Observational studySurgical endoscopy2021
Robotic colorectal cancer surgery in China: a nationwide retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Phased active warming protocol for prevention of intraoperative hypothermia in Da Vinci robot-assisted radical resection of rectal cancer.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Exploring needs, prevalence and experience with robotic-assisted surgery training among residents: a mixed method study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer shows similar clinical efficacy to laparoscopic surgery: A propensity score matched study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Comparing short-term outcomes of robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision surgery for rectal cancer in elderly patients.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Propensity matched analysis of minimally invasive and open radical resection for rectal cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes in elderly/frail patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Comparative study of robotic-assisted vs. laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a single-center experience.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Risk factors for severe low anterior resection syndrome in patients with rectal cancer undergoing sphincter‑preserving resection: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- Robot-assisted general surgery is safe during the learning curve: a 5-year Australian experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Structured training curricula for robotic colorectal surgery in China: does laparoscopic experience affect training effects?Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Article
- Optimizing cecal views during colonoscopy using patient position change.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Postoperative complications after robotic resection of colorectal cancer: An analysis based on 5-year experience at a large-scale center.World journal of gastrointestinal 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
31 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic colorectal cancer surgery is widely accepted and applied. However, there is still no objective and comprehensive assessment on the data of nationwide multicenter series.
methodA total of 28 medical centers in Mainland China participated in this nationwide retrospective observational study. From the first case performed in each center to the last until December 2017, patients with robotic resection for primary tumor and pathologically confirmed colorectal adenocarcinoma were consecutively enrolled. Clinical, pathological and follow-up data were collected and analyzed.
resultsA total of 5389 eligible patients were finally enrolled in this study, composing 72.2% of the total robotic colorectal surgery volume of Mainland China in the same period. For resections of one bowel segment of primary tumor, the postoperative mortality rate was 0.08% (4/5063 cases), and the postoperative complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher) was 8.6% (434/5063 cases). For multiple resections, the postoperative mortality rate was 0.6% (2/326 cases), and the postoperative complication rate was 16.3% (53/326 cases). Out of 2956 patients receiving sphincter-preserving surgery in only primary resection, 130 (4.4%) patients had anastomotic leakage. Traditional low anterior resection (tumor at middle rectum) (OR 2.384, P < 0.001), traditional low anterior resection (tumor at low rectum) (OR 1.968, P = 0.017) and intersphincteric resection (OR 5.468, P = 0.006) were significant independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage. Female gender (OR 0.557, P = 0.005), age ≥ 60 years (OR 0.684, P = 0.040), and preventive stoma (OR 0.496, P = 0.043) were significant independent protective factors. Body mass index, preoperative chemotherapy/radiotherapy, tumor size, and TNM stage did not independently affect the occurrence of anastomotic leakage.
conclusionRobotic colorectal cancer surgery was safe and reliable and might have advantages in patients at high risk of anastomotic leakage.
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.