ArticleBMC surgery2021
No beneficial effect on survival but a decrease in postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer undergoing robotic surgery: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A comparison of perioperative outcomes for da Vinci robotic-assisted, laparoscopic and open surgery in oncologic procedures: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of evidence from China.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The Frequency of Urination Dysfunction in Patients Operated on for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of an established colorectal robotic programme at an NHS district general hospital: audit of outcomes and systematic review of published data.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Short-term clinical outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted rectal resections: a multicenter real-world evidence study from Indian collaborative group on rectal resections (ICGRR).Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Efficacy comparison of optimal natural orifice specimen extraction for robotic middle rectal cancer resection in women: transanal or transvaginal orifice.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Analysis of the impact on sexual function in early-onset overweight male patients with rectal cancer following robotic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Robotic-assisted surgery for left-sided colon and rectal resections is associated with reduction in the postoperative surgical stress response and improved short-term outcomes: a cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: single-center, retrospective, propensity score analyses.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Adjuvant Radiotherapy Is Not Necessary for Stage III Mucinous Rectal Cancer: Evidence Based on Long Survival Analysis from SEER Data.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
- Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic left colectomy for radical treatment of colon cancer: a retrospective analysis in a consecutive series of 211 patients.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
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
Abstract
backgroundRobotic surgery has been taken as a new modality to surpass the technical limitations of conventional surgery. Here we aim to compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with rectal cancer receiving robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery.
methodsData from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between March 2011 and December 2018 were obtained for outcome assessment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. All patients were separated into two groups: a robot group (patients receiving robotic surgery, n = 314) and a laparoscopy group (patients receiving laparoscopic surgery, n = 220). The primary endpoint was survival outcomes. The secondary endpoints were the general conditions of the operation, postoperative complications and pathological characteristics.
resultsThe 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at years 1, 3 and 5 were 96.6%, 88.7%, and 87.7% vs. 96.7%, 88.1%, and 78.4%, and 98.6%, 80.2-, and 73.5% vs. 96.2-, 87.2-, and 81.1% in the robot and laparoscopy groups, respectively (P > 0.05). In the multivariable-adjusted analysis, robotic surgery was not an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS (P = 0.925 and 0.451, respectively). With respect to the general conditions of the operation, patients in the robot group had significantly shorter operation times (163.5 ± 40.9 vs. 190.5 ± 51.9 min), shorter times to 1
conclusionsThis monocentre retrospective comparative cohort study revealed short-term advantages of robot-assisted rectal cancer resection but similar survival compared to conventional laparoscopy.
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.