Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31372887›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer in the US: a skewed population.

Asya Ofshteyn, Katherine Bingmer, Christopher W Towe, Emily Steinhagen, Sharon L Stein

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Asya OfshteynDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals Research in Surgical Outcome & Effectiveness (UH-RISES), University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Avenue, LKS 5047, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3068-0911
Katherine BingmerDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals Research in Surgical Outcome & Effectiveness (UH-RISES), University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Avenue, LKS 5047, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Christopher W ToweDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals Research in Surgical Outcome & Effectiveness (UH-RISES), University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Avenue, LKS 5047, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Emily SteinhagenDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals Research in Surgical Outcome & Effectiveness (UH-RISES), University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Avenue, LKS 5047, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Sharon L SteinDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals Research in Surgical Outcome & Effectiveness (UH-RISES), University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Avenue, LKS 5047, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. Sharon.stein@uhhospitals.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocioeconomic and racial differences have been associated with disparities in cancer care within the US, including disparate access to minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. We hypothesized that robotic approach to rectal cancer may be associated with similar disparities.

methodsThe National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients over 18 years old with clinical stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent a proctectomy between 2010 and 2014. Demographic and hospital factors were analyzed for association with robotic approach. Factors identified on bivariate analyses informed multivariate analysis.

resultsWe identified 33,503 patients who met inclusion criteria; 3702 (11.1%) underwent robotic surgery with 7.8% conversion rate. Patients who received robotic surgery were more likely to be male, white, privately insured and with stage III cancer. They were also more likely to live in a metropolitan area, more than 25 miles away from the hospital and with a higher high school graduation rate. The treating hospital was more likely to be academic and high volume.

conclusionsRobotic surgery is performed rarely and access to it is limited for patients who are female, black, older, non-privately insured and unable to travel to high-volume teaching institutions. The advantages of robotic surgery may not be available to all patients given disparate access to the robot. This inherent bias in access to robot may skew study populations, preventing generalizability of robotic surgery research.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOcular Motility DisordersProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUnited StatesHealthcare disparitiesMinimally invasive surgeryProctectomyRectal cancerRobotic surgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.