Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34709537›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2022

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a retrospective cohort study of the Binational Colorectal Cancer Database.

Edward M Clarke, Jessica Rahme, Tomas Larach, Amrish Rajkomar, Anshini Jain, Richard Hiscock, Satish Warrier, Philip Smart

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07138859 (Prospective, Multiceter, Randomized, Controlled Study on the Intraoperative Technical Errors of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Radical Right Hemiclectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07138859 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Prospective, Multiceter, Randomized, Controlled Study on the Intraoperative Technical Errors of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Radical Right Hemiclectomy (Superiority Design,ROBOGEON® 2501study)

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao UniversityRan2025 to 2030Enrolled368ConditionsColorectal Carcinoma (CRC), Right HemicolectomyArmsRobot assisted radical right hemicolectomy (D3 lymph node dissection), Laparoscopic assisted radical right hemicolectomy (D3 lymph node dissection)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Edward M ClarkeDepartment of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia. ed.clarke@austin.org.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5611-5558
Jessica RahmeDepartment of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia.
Tomas LarachDepartment of Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Amrish RajkomarGeneral Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Richmond, Melbourne, VIC, 3121, Australia.
Anshini JainDepartment of Surgery, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Melbourne, VIC, 3128, Australia.
Richard HiscockTranslational Obstetrics Group, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Satish WarrierDepartment of Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Philip SmartDepartment of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia.
Epworth Hospital · AUAustin Health · AUEastern Health · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic right hemicolectomy (RRC) may have technical advantages over the conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) due to higher degrees of rotation, articulation, and tri-dimensional imaging. There is growing literature describing advantages of RRC compared to LRC; however, there is a lack of evidence about safety, oncologic quality of surgery and cost. This study aimed to analyse complication rates, length of stay and nodal harvest in patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from a prospective Australasian colorectal cancer database. This was a retrospective cohort study using nearest neighbour matching. The Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) provided the data for analysis. The primary outcome was length of stay. Secondary outcomes were harvested lymph node count, anastomotic leak, postoperative haemorrhage, abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, wound infections and non-surgical complications. 4977 patients who underwent robotic (n = 146) or laparoscopic (n = 4831) right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer were included. For RRC, LOS was shorter (5 vs 6.9 days, p = 0.01) and nodal harvest was higher (22 vs 19, p = 0.04). For RRC, surgical complications (5.9% vs 14.2%, p < 0.004) and non-surgical complications (4.6% vs 11.7%, p = 0.007) were lower though there was no difference in return to theatre or inpatient death. Robotic right hemicolectomy is associated shorter LOS and marginally higher lymph node count, though this may reflect anastomotic technique rather than surgical platform. Longer term studies are required to establish differences in overall survival, incisional hernia rates and cost effectiveness.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAnastomosis, SurgicalColectomyHumansLength of StayOperative TimeProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeColectomyColorectal neoplasmsIntracorporeal anastomosisRobotic surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID34709537
OpenAlexW3211214772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.