Observational studyJournal of robotic surgery2022
Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for cancer: a prospective comparison between robotics and laparoscopy.
Observational study in Journal of robotic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for patients ≥ 65 years of age: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Right Colectomy with Intracorporeal Handsewn Anastomosis: Surgical Technique and Narrative Review of Literature.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Robotic right colectomy is associated with reduced conversion to open surgery in patients with obesity.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2025Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision using a cranial approach: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Intracorporeal stapled versus extracorporeal hand-sewn anastomosis in minimal-invasive right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision - a retrospective single center analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision, central vascular ligation and hand-sewn intracorporeal anastomosis: feasibility, safety, and learning curve analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Multicenter prospective study on anastomotic leakage after right-sided colon cancer surgery with laparoscopic intracorporeal overlap anastomosis (KYCC 2101).Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- Review
- Laparoscopic or Robotically Assisted Colectomy with a Pfannenstiel Incision Reduces the Incisional Hernia Incidence.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2024Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal anastomosis for right colon cancer surgery.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2022Review
- Short- and Long-Term Outcome of Laparoscopic- versus Robotic-Assisted Right Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Robotic-assisted Surgery: Expanding Indication to Colon Cancer in Japan.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotics in right colectomy are still under debate. Available studies compare different techniques of ileocolic anastomosis but results are non-conclusive. Our study aimed to compare intraoperative outcomes, and short-term postoperative results between robotic and standard laparoscopic right colectomies for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) fashioned with the same technique. All consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomies with ICA for cancer in two hospitals, one of which is a tertiary care centre, were prospectively enrolled in our prospective observational study, from April 2018 to December 2019. ICA was fashioned with the same stapled hand-sewn technique. Continuous and categorical variables were analysed using t test and chi-squared test as required. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Forty patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 48 underwent robotic right colectomy and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Operative time was not statistically different between the two groups (robotic group 265.9 min vs laparoscopic group 254.2 min, p = 0.29). The robotic group had a significantly shorter time for stump oversewing (ileum reinforcement: robotic group 9.3 min vs laparoscopic group 14.2 min, p < 0.001; colon reinforcement: robotic 7.7. min, laparoscopy 13.9 min, p < 0.001) and for ICA (robotic 31.6 min vs laparoscopy 43.0, p < 0.001). One patient underwent extracorporeal anastomosis in the robotic group. The short-term outcomes were comparable between standard laparoscopic and robotic right colectomies with ICA. The limitation of the study is its small sample size and the fact that it was done in two institutions under the supervision of one person. Our data demonstrate that intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis is safe, and faster and easier with robotic systems. Robotics can facilitate more challenging ICA in minimally invasive surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34368911What 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.