ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2020
Robotic
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a systematic review of the evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic right colectomy and laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy using the modified age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Short-term outcomes of single-port robotic surgery versus single-port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: a multicenter matched-cohort analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- A comparative analysis of staple height used for robotic right colectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Review
- A retrospective comparison of 90-day outcomes, length of stay, and readmissions between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy outcomes in colon adenocarcinoma in the elderly population: a propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Short- and Long-Term Outcome of Laparoscopic- versus Robotic-Assisted Right Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral studies have shown the safety, feasibility and oncologic adequacy of robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH). Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered technically challenging. Robotic surgery has been introduced to overcome this technical limitation, but it is related to high costs. To maximize the benefits of such surgery, only selected patients are candidates for this technique. In addition, due to progressive aging of the population, an increasing number of minimally invasive procedures are performed on elderly patients with severe comorbidities, who are usually more prone to post-operative complications.
aimTo investigate the outcomes of RRH
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 123 minimally invasive procedures (68 LRHs
resultsLOS, TFF, and time to first stool were significantly shorter in the robotic group: Median 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-8]
conclusionRRH is related to shorter LOS when compared with the laparoscopic approach, but older age and several comorbidities tend to reduce its benefits.
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.