ArticleBMC surgery2022
Male urogenital function after robot-assisted and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC surgery, 2022. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2024 for the treatment of colorectal cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Guideline
- Functional outcomes and quality of life following open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted versus transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Urinary and sexual function after robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- 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
- Robotic vs. 3D laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study of short-term outcomes and functional recovery.Frontiers in surgery · 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 low anterior resection for rectal cancer shows similar clinical efficacy to laparoscopic surgery: A propensity score matched study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Technical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal tumors: a single-center safety and feasibility study.Surgery today · 2024Article
- The consequences of laparoscopic fascial space priority approach to lateral lymph node dissection on urinary and sexual functionality.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery I-type F methodWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrogenital dysfunction is recognized as a serious complication affecting patient quality of life after rectal cancer surgery to treat rectal cancer; however, the studies focus on the urogenital function after robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery are limited.
methodsMale patients undergoing robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME) were prospectively enrolled. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scale were used to compare the urogenital function of the two groups preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.
resultsEighty-nine patients who planned to undergo R-TME and L-TME were prospectively enrolled; 77 patients of these patients (86.5%) completed all questionnaires at all time points and were thus included in the final analysis. Of the included patients, 38 underwent R-TME and 39 underwent L-TME. There was no significant difference in age, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, tumor location, neoadjuvant therapy, operation method, postoperative pathological results and adjuvant therapy between the two groups. Preoperative urogenital function was similar in both groups; however, the IPSS was significantly lower in R-TME patients than that in T-TME patients at 6 months and 12 months [(7.82 ± 2.25 vs. 9.95 ± 3.01, P = 0.006; 7.62 ± 2.5 vs. 9.12 ± 2.64, P = 0.012)]. IIEF-5 scores decreased 3 months after R-TME and L-TME surgery (14.87 ± 3.27 vs. 13.92 ± 3.62, p = 0.231) and then gradually increased; at 12 months, IIEF-5 scores were comparable to those at baseline in both groups. IIEF-5 scores were higher in R-TME patients than those in L-TME patients at 6 months (18.55 ± 3.45 vs. 16.75 ± 3.26, P = 0.021), but there was no significant difference between the two groups at 12 months (21.22 ± 3.06 vs. 19.95 ± 3.03, P = 0.071).
conclusionsThe robotic approach for TME was associated with more rapid restoration of male urogenital function than the laparoscopic 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.