ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a propensity score-matched analysis.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological, perioperative, and survival-related outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in high-risk patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic‑assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Learning Curve on Lymph Nodes Retrieval and Postoperative Length of Hospital Stay in Robotic Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective, Observational Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted sugery for rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant therapy: a large volume single center experience.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Short-term outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The benefits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) for rectal cancer remain controversial. Only a few studies have evaluated the safety and feasibility of RALS following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of RALS versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) after NCRT for rectal cancer. Propensity score matching of 111 consecutive patients who underwent RALS or CLS after NCRT for rectal adenocarcinoma between February 2014 and February 2022 was performed. Among them, 60 matched patients were enrolled and their short-term outcomes were compared. Although operative time, conversion rate to open laparotomy and blood loss were comparable, the incidence of postoperative complications, including anastomotic leakage, was significantly lower, urinary retention tended to be lower, and the days to soft diet intake and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the RALS than the CLS group. No postoperative mortality was observed in either group, and there were no significant differences in terms of resection margins and number of lymph nodes dissected. RALS after NCRT for rectal cancer is safe and technically feasible, and has acceptable short-term outcomes. Further studies are required for validation of the long-term oncological outcomes.
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.