ArticleBJS open2021
Outcomes of robotic low anterior resection versus transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
Article in BJS open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Committee Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Guideline
- Transanal versus transabdominal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in minimally invasive surgery: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes of robotic versus transanal total mesorectal excision in patients with rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Pooled it
- Repositioning transanal total mesorectal excision in the robotic era.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus transanal total mesorectal excision for mid-low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison of transanal total mesorectal excision and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Transanal vs Laparoscopic and Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Mid-to-low Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Oncological Functional and Postoperative Outcomes.Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) is regarded as a fundamental key to the oncological outcome of rectal cancer. Robotic low anterior resection (RLAR) and transanal TME (TaTME) were developed to overcome the technical challenges of conventional open TME. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of RLAR versus TaTME for rectal cancer.
methodsRetrospective data from patients undergoing RLAR or TaTME at a colorectal unit in Singapore were analysed. The primary outcomes were the short-term clinical and pathological results including specimen margins and quality of TME. Secondary outcomes were recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival rates.
resultsA total of 80 patients who underwent either RLAR or TaTME were analysed. The TaTME group had a shorter operating time than the RLAR group (354 versus 481 min respectively; P < 0.001) and fewer stays in the high-dependency and intensive care units (38.1 versus 73.7 per cent; P = 0.010). There was a higher rate of readmissions at 30 days in the TaTME group (19.0 versus 0 per cent; P = 0.006). Specimens from TaTME had greater proximal (14.0 versus 10.0 cm; P = 0.045) and distal (2.50 versus 1.65 cm; P = 0.021) margins. Patients undergoing TaTME had borderline longer DFS (25.9 versus 15.7 months; P = 0.049). Subgroup analysis of patients with (y)pT3-4 tumours showed fewer positive circumferential resection margins with TaTME (0 versus 18.2 per cent; P = 0.019) and improved DFS (25.9 versus 15.7 months; P = 0.017).
conclusionSuperior margins were obtained with TaTME, especially in locally advanced tumours, although TaTME was associated with a higher readmission rate compared with RLAR.
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.