Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36362789›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Robotic-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Proctectomy with Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: An Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes from a Tertiary Referral Center.

Jasper Max Gebhardt, Neno Werner, Andrea Stroux, Frank Förster, Ioannis Pozios, Claudia Seifarth, Christian Schineis, Carsten Kamphues, Benjamin Weixler, Katharina Beyer and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. IDEAL-compliant implementation of the DexterInnovative surgical sciences · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jasper Max GebhardtDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Neno WernerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7581-1834
Andrea StrouxInstitute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Campus Mitte-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Frank FörsterCorporate Controlling Department, Campus Mitte-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 2, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Ioannis PoziosDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3462-9822
Claudia SeifarthDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Christian SchineisDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9189-6751
Carsten KamphuesDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5406-8540
Benjamin WeixlerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Katharina BeyerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7578-280X
Johannes Christian LauscherDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Campus Benjamin Franklin-Charité University Medicine Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEPark-Klinik Weißensee · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEZimmer Biomet (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery is gaining popularity, but limited data are available on the safety, efficacy, and cost of robotic-assisted restorative proctectomy with the construction of an ileal pouch and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted comparing consecutively performed robotic-assisted and laparoscopic proctectomy with IPAA between 1 January 2016 and 31 September 2021. In total, 67 adult patients with medically refractory UC without proven dysplasia or carcinoma underwent surgery: 29 operated robotically and 38 laparoscopically. Results: There were no differences between both groups regarding postoperative complications within 30 days according to Clavien-Dindo classification’ grades 1−5 (51.7% vs. 42.1%, p = 0.468) and severe grades 3b−5 (17.2% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.485). Robotic-assisted surgery was associated with an increased urinary tract infection rate (n = 7, 24.1% vs. n = 1, 2.6%; p = 0.010) and longer operative time (346 ± 65 min vs. 281 ± 66 min; p < 0.0001). Surgery costs were higher when operated robotically (median EUR 10.377 [IQR EUR 4.727] vs. median EUR 6.689 [IQR EUR 3.170]; p < 0.0001), resulting in reduced total inpatient profits (median EUR 110 [IQR EUR 4.971] vs. median EUR 2.853 [IQR EUR 5.386]; p = 0.001). Conclusion: Robotic-assisted proctectomy with IPAA can be performed with comparable short-term clinical outcomes to laparoscopy but is associated with a longer duration of surgery and higher surgery costs. As experience increases, some advantages may become evident regarding operative time, postoperative recovery, and length of stay. The robotic procedure might then become cost-efficient.

Indexed as

colorectal surgeryileal pouch-anal anastomosisinpatient costsIPAAlaparoscopic surgeryrestorative proctocolectomyrobotic-assisted surgeryulcerative colitis

Identifiers

PMID36362789
PMCPMC9657553
OpenAlexW4308509799

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.