ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2020
A review of clinical and oncological outcomes following the introduction of the first robotic colorectal surgery programme to a university teaching hospital in Ireland using a dual console training platform.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic inflammatory response after robotic versus laparoscopic abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with colorectal cancer subgroup analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review of robotic surgery curricula using a contemporary educational framework.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Pre-Procedural Robotic Surgery Curricula: A Systematic Review and Thematic Meta-Synthesis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
- Learning curves and outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery: A single-surgeon experience within a structured dual-console training program.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Risk Factors Involved in the Blood (Leukocyte-Depleted Suspended Red Blood Cells and Plasma) Transfusion During Glioma Operations.Journal of blood medicine · 2025Article
- Robotic colorectal surgery training: Portsmouth perspective.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Review
- Robotic-assisted surgery for left-sided colon and rectal resections is associated with reduction in the postoperative surgical stress response and improved short-term outcomes: a cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Implementation of a robotic surgical practice in inflammatory bowel disease.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Robotic colorectal surgery in elderly patients: A single-centre experience.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2022Article
- Attitudes and access of Irish general surgery trainees to robotic surgical training.Surgery open science · 2022Article
- Operating on the Mesentery in Robotic Colonic Surgery-General Techniques.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2022Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case-matched study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- The impact of body mass index on outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery: a single-centre experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Teaching and Training Surgeons in Robotic Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2021Review
- Initial Experience in Rectal Cancer Surgery for the Next Generation of Robotic Surgeons Trained in a Dual Console System.Yonago acta medica · 2021Article
- State of the art in robotic rectal surgery: marginal gains worth the pain?Updates in surgery · 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
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted surgery is evolving, with improving clinical and cancer outcomes. The aim of this study was to present the clinical and cancer outcomes of patients undergoing robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RAS-CR) at University Hospital Limerick (UHL) since its introduction to the 100th case, using the daVinci Xi dual-console surgical system. The RAS-CR programme at UHL commenced in June 2016 and the 100th case was performed in July 2019. All patient-related data were recorded prospectively during the perioperative period by the RAS-CR team. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, version 22. One hundred patients were operated on, comprising of 47 males and 53 females. The median age was 65 years (IQR 13.0; range 25-84) with 69% of cases performed for cancer [N = 39 rectal cancer, N = 30 colon cancer], 20% for benign disease and 11% for dysplasia. Median length of stay for cancer operations was 6.5 days for colon cancer cases (5.0 days when cases with complications were excluded) and 7.0 days for rectal cancer cases. Median operative time was 255 mins (IQR 130 min; all cases), median docking time was 33 mins (IQR 20 mins) and median intra-operative blood loss was 80 ml (IQR 70 ml). Thirty-one patients developed a post-operative complication (5% anastomotic leak; 13% SSI). In cancer cases, median nodal harvest was 14 nodes (IQR10) and an R0 resection was achieved in 98.6% (n = 68) of cancer cases. Three patients (4.3%) developed metastatic disease at a median interval of 16.5 months. Clinical and operative outcomes remained stable over time from case 1 to 100. Structured introduction of a RAS-CR programme with appropriate governance and continuous audit results in favourable clinical and cancer outcomes and provides an excellent training opportunity for surgical residents.
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.