ArticleKansas journal of medicine2022
Is Two Better Than One? A Retrospective Study on Colorectal Surgery Outcomes Using the Da Vinci
Article in Kansas journal of medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Overview of dual console robotic training for surgical residents: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Risk-adjusted learning curve for robotic colorectal surgery in an educational setting: a single-center consecutive series.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Application Effect of Different Robotic Surgery Systems in Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Study Based on a Network Meta-analysis.European urology open science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The da Vinci Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted of patients who underwent various colorectal surgeries using either the single- or dual-console da Vinci Results: Seventy-one patients (54.2%) utilized the single-console and 60 (45.8%) utilized the dual-console. There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics, procedures performed, conversion to open, ICU admissions, total length of stay, need for blood transfusion, adequacy of surgical margin, number of lymph nodes harvested, anastomotic leak, discharge disposition, or readmission, wound infection, or need for reoperation within 30 days. There was a nonsignificant decrease in operative time with the dual-console system (200.6 vs. 220.2 minutes, p = 0.111). Conclusions: While this study showed no statistically significant differences between patient outcomes utilizing the single- versus dual-consoles, it showed that it is safe for use in training, and that more research is needed in this area.
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.