ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Comparison of robotic vs laparoscopic left-sided colorectal cancer resections.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Environmental impact of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The outcomes of robotic ileocolic resection in Crohn's disease compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic and laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer in Africa: an outcome comparison endorsed by the Nigerian society for colorectal disorders.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted left hemicolectomy: A pilot study on sustainability.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Trial
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic surgery in emergency general surgery: an overview of UK practice.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2025Article
- Article
- Robot-Assisted Colorectal Cancer Surgery Mitigates Early Postoperative Immunosuppression and Angiogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- A Narrative Review on the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Colorectal Cancer Management.Cureus · 2025Review
- RERAS-robotic colorectal resections and ERAS® in older adults: optimizing recovery or adding complexity?Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Optimizing Anesthetic Management for Laparoscopic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Review
- Simple pelvimetry predicts the pelvic manipulation time in robot-assisted low and ultra-low anterior resection for rectal cancer.Surgery today · 2024Article
- Enhanced recovery and reduced conversion rates in robotic rectal cancer surgery: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of early surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection reported by a busy district general hospital in England.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches to Treat Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of Literature.Cureus · 2023Review
- A Review of Robotic Surgery in Colorectal Surgery.Cureus · 2023Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic assisted surgery (RAS) has become increasingly adopted in colorectal cancer surgery. This study aims to compare robotic and laparoscopic approaches to left sided colorectal resections in terms of surgical outcomeswith no formal enhanced recovery programme. All patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic left sided or rectal (high and low anterior resection) cancer surgery at a single tertiary referral centre over 3 years were included.A total of 184 consecutive patients from July 2017 to December 2020 were included in this study, with 40.2% (n=74/184) undergoing RAS. The median age at time of surgery was 68 years (IQR 60-73 years). RAS had a significantly shorter length of median stay of 3 days, compared to 5 days in the conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) group (p<0.001). RAS had a significantly lower rate of conversion to open surgery (0% vs 16.4%, p<0.001). The median operative time was also shorter in RAS (308 minutes), compared to CLS (326 minutes, p=0.019). The overall rate of any complication was 16.8%, with the RAS experiencing a lower complication rate (12.2% vs 20.0%, p=0.041). There was no significant difference in anastomotic leak rates between the two groups (4.0% vs 5.5%, p=0.673), or in terms of complete resection (R0) (robotic 98.6%, laparoscopic 100%, p=0.095). Robotic left sided colorectal surgery delivers equivalent oncological resection compared to laparoscopic approaches, with the added benefits of reduced length of stay and lower rates of conversion to open surgery. This has both clinical and healthcare economic benefits.
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.