Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36945670›Full record

ArticleKorean journal of clinical oncology2021

Comparison of the quality of total mesorectal excision after robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a multicenter, propensity score-matched study.

Keehyun Park, Sohyun Kim, Hye Won Lee, Sung Uk Bae, Seong Kyu Baek, Woon Kyung Jeong

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Korean journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 76% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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.

Keehyun ParkDepartment of Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2089-3267
Sohyun KimDepartment of Surgery, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8625-329X
Hye Won LeeDepartment of Pathology, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8540-524X
Sung Uk BaeDepartment of Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7876-4196
Seong Kyu BaekDepartment of Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6427-8675
Woon Kyung JeongDepartment of Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8421-218X
Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center · KRYeungnam University Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and disease-free and overall survival rates between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for rectal cancer. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, 234 patients underwent curative robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer at two centers. Ultimately, 201 patients were enrolled. To control for different demographic factors in the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio. Propensity scores were generated with the baseline characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, previous abdominal surgery, tumor location, preoperative chemotherapy, and preoperative radiation. Finally, 134 patients were matched with 67 patients in the robotic surgery group and 67 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group. Results: There was no significant difference in the pathologic stages between the robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups. Distal margin involvement was only observed in the robotic surgery group (1/67, 1.5%). Circumferential resection margin involvement was not different between the robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups (3/67 [4.5%] and 4/67 [6.0%], respectively, P=1.000). The quality of TME (complete, nearly complete, and incomplete) was similar between the robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups (88.0%, 6.0%, 6.0% and 79.1%, 9.0%, 11.9%, respectively, P=0.358). The disease-free and overall survival rates were not significantly different between the groups. Conclusion: The quality of TME and disease-free and overall survival rates between the two surgeries were similar. There was no oncologic advantage of robotic surgery for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Indexed as

Rectal cancerRecurrenceRobotic surgerySurvivalTotal mesorectal excision

Identifiers

PMID36945670
PMCPMC9942754
OpenAlexW4205360029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.