ReviewCancers2021
Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients.
Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 7 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
52 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic and open surgery: an overview of systematic reviews.BMJ open · 2024Pooled 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
- Robot-assisted laparoscopy does not have demonstrable advantages over conventional laparoscopy in endometriosis surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review.The British journal of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: An Expedited Summary of the Clinical Evidence.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
- Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Robotic assisted surgery reduces ergonomic risk during minimally invasive colorectal resection: the VOLCANO randomised controlled trial.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Trial
- IGFBP-3 enhances irinotecan efficacy in colorectal cancerResearch in pharmaceutical sciences · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of short-term outcomes and costs.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- Short-term outcomes in robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: population-based study.BJS open · 2026Article
- Enhancing Surgical Efficiency and Cost-Effectiveness With TaTME-Combined Robot-Assisted Surgery for Lower Rectal Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Enabling non-microsurgeons to perform supermicrovascular anastomosis using a robotic assistant: A preclinical study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Low anterior resection syndrome after rectal cancer surgery: mechanisms, assessment, management, and the potential role of robotic surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Nanomedicine-Based Therapeutic Approaches in Colorectal Cancer Using Patient-Derived Xenograft Models: Prospects and Challenges.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Can Surgical Approach and Postoperative Factors Impact Survival in Rectal Cancer? Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Insights.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Increasing robotic rectal cancer surgery may not increase total hospital costs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The rise and potential opportunities of large language model agents in bioinformatics and biomedicine.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Robot-Assisted Colorectal Cancer Surgery Mitigates Early Postoperative Immunosuppression and Angiogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Transitioning to da Vinci Xi for colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective cohort study of 102 cases from a UK centre with a structured robotic programme.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted surgery is expected to have advantages over standard laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to 10 November 2021, for both RCTs and observational studies comparing robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Forty-Two were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% for RG and 98.8% for LG (OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.43;
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.