ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Robotic surgery for clinical T4 rectal cancer: short- and long-term outcomes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of robotic‑assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical Implementation and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Pelvic Exenteration for Primary Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Japanese Experience.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision With Synchronous Perineal Flap Reconstruction: Feasibility and Early Outcomes.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Article
- Treatment outcomes of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery with multivisceral resection of adjacent organs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic surgery enhances patients' survival in rectal cancer: a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Benefit of laparoscopic two-team transanal beyond total mesorectal excision for advanced and recurrent rectal cancer with invasion: a retrospective study compared with conventional laparoscopic approach.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- The KRAS G12D mutation increases the risk of unresectable recurrence of resectable colorectal liver-only metastasis.Surgery today · 2025Article
- Robotic versus open and laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for pelvic cancer: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis in Japan.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Minimally invasive versus open multivisceral resection for rectal cancer clinically invading adjacent organs: a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Propensity matched analysis of robotic and laparoscopic operations for mid-low rectal cancer: short-term comparison of anal function and oncological outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Long-term outcomes of upfront robotic rectal cancer surgery: a single-center, retrospective cohort study in Japan.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review and Description of the Technique.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Possible Advantages of Minimal-Invasive Approaches in Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Nationwide Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Robotic surgery for locally advanced T4 rectal cancer: feasibility and oncological quality.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Use of a Powered Circular Stapler Can Prevent Anastomotic Air Leakage in Robotic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2023Article
- Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Review
- Article
- Oncological Safety of Minimally Invasive Multivisceral Resection for cT4b Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Comparison With Open Surgery.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal surgical approach for clinical T4 (cT4) rectal cancer is unknown. This study was conducted to clarify short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer.
methodsIn our retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients who underwent robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer within 15 cm from the anal verge between 2011 and 2018. The short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated.
resultsOf a total of 122 eligible patients, 70 (57%) had cT4a tumors and 52 (43%) had cT4b tumors. Thirty-five patients (29%) had distant metastasis and 21 (17%) underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-four patients (28%) underwent combined resection of adjacent organs and 43 (35%) underwent lateral lymph node dissection. The median operative time was 288 min and the median blood loss was 11 ml. No patients required conversion to open surgery. The incidences of postoperative complications of grades II, III, and IV or more according to the Clavien-Dindo classification were 17.2%, 3.5%, and 0%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (60%) had pathological T4 tumors, and the incidence of positive resection margins was 4.9%. The median follow-up time was 42.9 months. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and cumulative local recurrence rates were 87.5%, 70.4%, and 4.0%, respectively.
conclusionsThe short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer were favorable. Robotic surgery is considered to be a useful approach for cT4 rectal cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33409593What 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.