ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2019
Clinical, oncological, and functional outcomes of Da Vinci (Xi)-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: a prospective, controlled cohort study of 51 consecutive cases.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional outcomes and quality of life following open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted versus transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Urinary and sexual function after robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The urinary and sexual outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Sexual function in chronic illness and cancer perspectives of the patient, partner, and healthcare provider; innovations; and updates: recommendations from the Fifth International Consultation on Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2024).Sexual medicine reviews · 2026Review
- Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- The impact of anastomotic leakage characteristics on the occurrence of anastomotic stenosis after colorectal resection, a retrospective cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
- Comparison of a robotic surgery program for rectal cancer: short- and long-term results from a comparative, retrospective study between two laparoscopic and robotic reference centers.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Essential updates 2020/2021: Advancing precision medicine for comprehensive rectal cancer treatment.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Review
- Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Rectal Cancer Compared with Open and Laparoscopic Surgery.Cancers · 2023Review
- Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Review
- Review
- Male urogenital function after robot-assisted and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Outcomes of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: an observational single hospital study of 300 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Observational
- Clinical efficacy of laparoscopic modified Parks operation on the ultra-low rectal cancer.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite the increasing use of telemanipulators in colorectal surgery, an additional benefit in terms of improved perioperative results is not proven. The aim of the study was to compare clinical, oncological, and functional results of Da Vinci (Xi)-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic (low) anterior resection for rectal cancer.
methodsMonocenter, prospective, controlled cohort study with a 12-month follow-up of bladder and sexual function using the validated questionnaires International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, and Female Sexual Function Index.
resultsFifty-one patients were included (18, Da Vinci (Xi) assisted; 33, conventional laparoscopy). Conversion to an open approach was more common in the Da Vinci cohort (p = 0.012). In addition, surgery and resumption of a normal diet took longer in the robotic group (p = 0.005; p = 0.042). Surgical morbidity and oncological quality did not differ. There was no difference in most functional domains, except for worsened ability to orgasm (p = 0.047) and sexual satisfaction (p = 0.034) in women after conventional laparoscopy. Moreover, we found a higher rate of improved bladder function in the conventional laparoscopy group (p = 0.023) and less painful sexual intercourse among women in the robot-assisted group (p = 0.049).
conclusionIn contrast to the ROLARR trial, a higher conversion rate was found in the robotic cohort, which may in part be explained by a learning curve effect. Nevertheless, the Da Vinci-assisted approach showed favorable results regarding sexual function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.