Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32086772›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2021

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy within a systematic ERAS protocol: a propensity-weighted analysis.

Marco Migliore, Maria Carmela Giuffrida, Alessandra Marano, Luca Pellegrino, Giorgio Giraudo, Fabio Barili, Felice Borghi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marco MiglioreDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3083-4092
Maria Carmela GiuffridaDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5596-8655
Alessandra MaranoDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2904-2170
Luca PellegrinoDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2475-3475
Giorgio GiraudoDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0273-0096
Fabio BariliDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9737-6087
Felice BorghiDepartment of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, 12100, Cuneo, Italy. borghi.f@ospedale.cuneo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2431-2020
Azienda Sanitaria Ospedaliera S.Croce e Carle Cuneo · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the early postoperative and pathological outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) to those of laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) with intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) within the systematic application of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. A single-institution prospective database of patients who underwent elective RRC or LRC with IA for neoplastic lesions between April 2010 and June 2018 was retrospectively reviewed. The patients' demographic characteristics, and perioperative and pathological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity-weighted analysis was employed to address potential selection biases of treatment allocation. A total of 216 patients (46 RRC, 170 LRC) were included. RRC demonstrated a significantly longer operative time (mean 242.43 min, SD 47.51) compared to LRC (mean 187.60 min, SD 56.60) (p = 0.001), confirmed by the propensity-weighted analysis (Coefficient 50.65; p < 0.001). Conversion rate between the two groups was comparable (p = 0.99). Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was the same in the RRC and the LRC group (4 days, p = 0.35). Readmission rate within 30 days in the RRC and LRC group was 2.2% and 2.4%, respectively (p = 0.99). Overall 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality was 32.6% versus 27.1% (p = 0.46), and 0% versus 1.2% (p = 0.99) in the robotic and laparoscopic groups, respectively. No difference was found in the number of harvested lymph nodes (p = 0.75). In an ERAS environment, without the bias of mixed techniques of anastomosis, RRC had similar postoperative and pathological outcomes compared to the laparoscopic approach, but was associated with a longer operative time.

Indexed as

ColectomyEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEnhanced recovery after surgeryLaparoscopicRight colectomyRobotic

Identifiers

PMID32086772
OpenAlexW3006718219

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.