ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Oncological and anorectal functional outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection in lower rectal cancer, particularly the extent of sphincter resection and sphincter saving.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety Between da Vinci Robotic and Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Surgical Results of Hand-Sewn Versus Stapled Anastomosis for Lower Rectal Cancer Located 4-5 cm From the Anal Verge: A Subanalysis of the Ultimate Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Predictive model for sphincter preservation in lower rectal cancer.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- The Review of Modified Intersphincteric Resection in the Treatment of Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for patients with low rectal cancer: Short-term outcomes.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- Textbook anastomotic success in patients with low rectal cancer treated by intersphincteric resection: reappraising surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Application of Y-Z deformable magnetic ring for recanalization of transanal single-access rectal stricture.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a case matched study reporting a median of 7-year long-term oncological and functional outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Comparison between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
- Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Review
- Trans-Anastomotic Drainage Tube Placement After Hand-Sewn Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: An Alternative Drainage Method.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Review
- Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- Re-evaluation of possible vulnerable sites in the lateral pelvic cavity to local recurrence during robot-assisted total mesorectal excision.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Review
- Optimising functional outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Review
- Risk Factors for Anorectal Dysfunction After Interspincteric Resection in Patients With Low Rectal Cancer.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Current Evidences and Future Perspectives.Annals of coloproctology · 2020Review
- Ultimate Functional Preservation With Intersphincteric Resection for Rectal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew investigations to date assessing the effectiveness of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection (ISR) have included sufficient patients and follow-up period. This study assessed the utility and safety of robot-assisted ISR by comparing groups of patients who underwent low anterior resection (LAR) with or without ISR and ISR extent.
methodsThis study enrolled 897 patients who underwent curative LAR between 2010 and 2017. Patients were divided into those who did (ISR+) and did not (ISR-) undergo ISR, with the former group subdivided by ISR extent (partial, subtotal, and total). Tumor recurrence and survival were compared in the two groups by one-to-one nearest neighbor matching (218 patients each).
resultsRobot-assisted ISR was performed via an entirely transabdominal approach in 93% of patients who underwent LAR. The rate of circumferential margin positivity was ≤ 2% in all patients and did not differ in the ISR- and ISR+ groups or in the three ISR+ subgroups. Mean fecal incontinence score and manometric values deteriorated significantly during postoperative until 12-24 months (p < 0.05 to < 0.001), but recovered subsequently. The 5-year cumulative rates of local recurrence in the ISR+ and ISR- groups were 2.5% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.731). The 5-year cumulative rates of overall (86.7% vs. 84.2%, p = 0.899) and disease-free (80.7% vs. 78.5%, p = 0.934) survival did not differ significantly in the ISR+ and ISR- groups.
conclusionsBecause ISR involves resection of low-lying tumors and complex pelvic dissection, robot-assisted ISR via a mostly transabdominal procedure may be technically more efficient, providing lasting anorectal function and good oncologic outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31332563What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.