Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35678902›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting.

Markus Hirschburger, Rolf Schneider, Sophie Kraenzlein, Winfried Padberg, Andreas Hecker, Martin Reichert

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Markus HirschburgerDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Worms, Gabriel-von-Seidl-Strasse 81, 67550, Worms, Germany.
Rolf SchneiderDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Worms, Gabriel-von-Seidl-Strasse 81, 67550, Worms, Germany.
Sophie KraenzleinDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Worms, Gabriel-von-Seidl-Strasse 81, 67550, Worms, Germany.
Winfried PadbergDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic, Transplant and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital of Giessen, Rudolf-Buchheim-Strasse 7, 35390, Giessen, Germany.
Andreas Hecker *Department of General, Visceral, Thoracic, Transplant and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital of Giessen, Rudolf-Buchheim-Strasse 7, 35390, Giessen, Germany.
Martin Reichert *Department of General, Visceral, Thoracic, Transplant and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital of Giessen, Rudolf-Buchheim-Strasse 7, 35390, Giessen, Germany. martin.reichert@chiru.med.uni-giessen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0795-0941
Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg · DEUniversity of Applied Sciences Worms · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRight colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

methodsRetrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

resultsThe conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2-8] days, ECA: 3 [1-6] days, ICA: 3 [1-5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

conclusionThe current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresColectomyHumansLearning CurveRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBowel dysfunctionComplete mesocolic excisionIleusIntracorporal anastomosisRight colectomyRobot

Identifiers

PMID35678902
PMCPMC9640414
OpenAlexW4281672026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.