ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer in the US: a skewed population.
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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Disparities in robot utilization in colorectal surgery: the widening gap.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Disparities in access to and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic surgery in healthcare: current challenges, technological advances, and global implementation prospects.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Recent racial/ethnic disparities in cancer-specific mortality among patients diagnosed with rectal cancer.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Exploring the complexity and spectrum of racial/ethnic disparities in colon cancer management.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Disparities in utilization of robotic surgery for colon cancer: an evaluation of the U.S. National Cancer Database.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Assessing the role of robotic proctectomy in obese patients: a contemporary NSQIP analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Effect of Socio-Economic Status on Perioperative Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Pulmonary Lobectomy.Cureus · 2022Article
- Population demographics in geographic proximity to hospitals with robotic platforms do not correlate with disparities in access to robotic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
31372887What 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.