SynthesisAnnals of surgery2023
The RECOURSE Study: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes Associated With Robotically Assisted Minimally Invasive Procedures for Endometrial, Cervical, Colorectal, Lung, or Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- The evidence behind robot-assisted abdominopelvic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical fluorescent probes: mechanisms, advantages and inspirations.Chemical science · 2026Review
- Computer-assisted and image-guided surgery for surgical lymph-nodal staging of gynecologic cancer in the era of digital and robotic surgery: a review of current evidence.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- [Ethical and Humanistic Reflections on the Use of Remote Robotic Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecology].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2026Article
- Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Updated Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Functional, oncologic and clinical outcomes of robotic rectal resection using the Hugo™ RAS system versus laparoscopic surgery: A comparative cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Observational
- Comparison of outcomes of robot-assisted vs. open or laparoscopic of radical prostatectomy: a population-based cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Rise in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Is Associated With Adoption of Robotic Surgery.Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2025Article
- 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
- Correspondence on "Robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: current trends and controversies".Journal of Cancer · 2025Article
- Opinion, uptake and current practice of robot-assisted upper gastrointestinal and oesophagogastric surgery in the UK: AUGIS national survey results.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024Article
- Comparing oncological outcomes of robotic versus open surgery in the treatment of endometrial cancer.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Return to Intended Oncological Therapy: State of the Art and Perspectives.Current oncology reports · 2024Review
- The modified Surgical Apgar Score predictive value for postoperative complications after robotic surgery for rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Oncologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: an ACS-NSQIP analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Robot-assisted oesophagectomy (Ivor-Lewis) for a complex stenosis previously managed by open gastrostomy tube placement.BMJ case reports · 2024Article
- The death of laparoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Propensity matched analysis of minimally invasive and open radical resection for rectal cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes in elderly/frail patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Challenges in the Diagnosis and Individualized Treatment of Cervical Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Essential updates 2020/2021: Advancing precision medicine for comprehensive rectal cancer treatment.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess long-term outcomes with robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery for colorectal, urologic, endometrial, cervical, and thoracic cancers.
backgroundMinimally invasive surgery provides perioperative benefits and similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Recent robotic surgery data have questioned long-term benefits.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer outcomes based on surgical approach was conducted based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines using Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase. Hazard ratios for recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted/estimated using a hierarchical decision tree and pooled in RevMan 5.4 using inverse-variance fixed-effect (heterogeneity nonsignificant) or random effect models.
resultsOf 31,204 references, 199 were included (7 randomized, 23 database, 15 prospective, 154 retrospective studies)-157,876 robotic, 68,007 laparoscopic/thoracoscopic, and 234,649 open cases. Cervical cancer: OS and DFS were similar between robotic and laparoscopic [1.01 (0.56, 1.80), P =0.98] or open [1.18 (0.99, 1.41), P =0.06] surgery; 2 papers reported less recurrence with open surgery [2.30 (1.32, 4.01), P =0.003]. Endometrial cancer: the only significant result favored robotic over open surgery [OS; 0.77 (0.71, 0.83), P <0.001]. Lobectomy: DFS favored robotic over thoracoscopic surgery [0.74 (0.59, 0.93), P =0.009]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.93 (0.87, 1.00), P =0.04]. Prostatectomy: recurrence was less with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery [0.77 (0.68, 0.87), P <0.0001]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.78 (0.72, 0.85), P <0.0001]. Low-anterior resection: OS significantly favored robotic over laparoscopic [0.76 (0.63, 0.91), P =0.004] and open surgery [0.83 (0.74, 0.93), P =0.001].
conclusionsLong-term outcomes were similar for robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery, with no safety signal or indication requiring further research (PROSPERO Reg#CRD42021240519).
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.