SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2023
Cost-effectiveness comparison of minimally invasive, robotic and open approaches in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 7 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is robotic colorectal surgery worth the cost? An umbrella review integrating clinical outcomes, learning curve, and economic evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Surgical outcomes in pelvic reconstruction using robot-assisted rectus abdominis muscle flaps: a systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic surgery in healthcare for older individuals: a systematic review based on randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of perioperative and long-term outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluating the economic efficiency of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of ergonomics using the DEXTERSurgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Economic, resource-use, and adoption signals in the robotic colorectal surgery literature: a bibliometric and visualization study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Comparison of laparoscopic and robotic right hemicolectomy: insights from a single centre.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2026Article
- Beyond the console: surgeon's perceptions & attitudes towards robotic surgery in Saudi Arabia: a nationwide cross- sectional survey.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of short-term outcomes and costs.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- A cost comparison between patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery with and without a clinical pathway.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Treatment in 2026: An Updated Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Robotic Surgery in Gynecology: Balancing Clinical Benefit, Cost-Effectiveness, and Accessibility.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- White paper on effective preacquisition evaluation of soft tissue robotic surgery platforms for healthcare institutions.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques in the Treatment of Appendicitis: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Cost analysis of robot NICE procedure versus open, laparoscopic, and robotic colorectal surgery: is there an economic benefit to natural orifice resection?Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Robotic Segmental Resection of the Splenic Flexure and Mid-Transverse Colon for Malignancy Treatment: A Systematic Review of Operative Techniques, Anastomotic Approaches, and Surgical and Oncological Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study compares the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic (LAP), laparoscopic-assisted (LAPA), hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL), and robotic colorectal surgery using a network meta-analysis.
methodsRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of comparing the five different approaches in colorectal surgery were included in a literature search until September 2022. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were reported for total costs, surgical costs, operating time, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of surgical approaches into homogeneous clusters. The cophenetic correlation coefficient (cc) was evaluated to identify the most cost-effective clustering method. The primary outcomes assessed were: costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy, measuring total costs against postoperative complications, mortality rate, and LOS, respectively.
results22 RCTs with 4239 patients were included. Open surgery had the lowest total costs, surgical costs, and operating time but the longest LOS and most postoperative complications. LOS was significantly decreased in LAP compared to open surgery (OR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.46-0.96). Robotic surgery resulted in the highest total costs, surgical costs, and most extended operative duration but the shortest LOS and lowest mortality. LAPA and robotic surgery were superior in the costs-morbidity analysis. HAL was associated with the worst costs-mortality profile. LAP, LAPA, and HAL were better in terms of costs-efficacy.
conclusionOverall, LAP and LAPA are the most cost-effective approaches for colorectal surgery in terms of overall postoperative complications, mortality, and LOS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36988723What 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.