ArticleSurgery today2022
Advantages of robotic abdominoperineal resection compared with laparoscopic surgery: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Surgery today, 2022. 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, and mortality.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Primary closure versus vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous (VRAM) flap closure of perineal wound following abdominoperineal resection-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of patient factors on outcomes in robotic major and minor hepatectomy: importance of patient selection.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Comparing Prophylactic Administration of Sulbactam/Ampicillin Versus Cefmetazole for Prevention of Perineal Wound Infection Following Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Perioperative management of colorectal surgical patients receiving a direct oral anticoagulant: a scoping review, particular emphasis on procedure-specific risks, and pharmacogenomics.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Pelvic Reinforcement Procedure for Preventing Postoperative Perineal Hernia After Robotic Abdominoperineal Resection: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Predictors of difficulty in robotic splenic flexure mobilization during rectal cancer surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Review
- Incidence and risk factors for perineal hernia after robotic abdominoperineal resection: a single-center, retrospective cohort study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- RoboticWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Streamlining robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery for rectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis using the Japanese Nationwide diagnosis procedure combination database.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Long-term outcomes of upfront robotic rectal cancer surgery: a single-center, retrospective cohort study in Japan.Surgery today · 2023Article
- The impact of mesorectal fat area on recurrence following total mesorectal excision for lower rectal cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- RoboticIn 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome the shortcomings of laparoscopic surgery, studies focusing on abdominoperineal resection are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the operative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted from April 2010 to March 2020. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent robotic or laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection without lateral lymph node dissection were enrolled. The perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared.
resultsWe evaluated 33 and 20 patients in the robotic and laparoscopic groups, respectively. The median operative time and blood loss were comparable between the two groups. No significant differences in the overall complication rates were noted, whereas the rates of urinary dysfunction (3% vs. 26%, p = 0.02) and perineal wound infection (9% vs. 35%, p = 0.03) in the robotic group were significantly lower in comparison to the laparoscopic group. The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (8 days vs. 11 days, p < 0.01). The positive resection margin rates were comparable between the two groups.
conclusionRobotic abdominoperineal resection demonstrated better short-term outcomes than laparoscopic surgery, suggesting that it could be a useful approach.
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.