Observational studyLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Laparoscopic and robotic intracorporeal resection and end-to-end anastomosis in left colectomy: a prospective cohort study - stage 2a IDEAL framework for evaluating surgical innovation.
Observational study in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Colo-colic Anastomosis in Minimally-invasive Left Colectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Pooled it
- Safety of Ovine Forestomach Matrix Across 474 Soft Tissue Defects: Interim Results from the Prospective Multicenter MASTRR Registry.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive left colectomy with total intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis. A single center cohort study. Stage 2b IDEAL framework for evaluating surgical innovation.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the safety and feasibility of intracorporeal resection and anastomosis in upper rectum, sigmoid, and left colon surgery, via both laparoscopic and robotic approaches. The secondary aim was to assess possible short-term differences between laparoscopic versus robotic surgery.
methodsA prospective observational cohort study according to IDEAL framework exploration and assessment stage (Development, stage 2a), evaluating and comparing the laparoscopic approach and the robotic approach in left colon, sigmoid, and upper rectum surgery with intracorporeal resection and end-to-end anastomosis. Demographic, preoperative, surgical, and postoperative variables of patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic surgery are described and compared according to the surgical technique used.
resultsBetween May 2020 and March 2022, seventy-nine patients were consecutively included in the study, 41 operated via laparoscopy (laparoscopic left colectomy: LLC) and 38 by robotic surgery (robotic left colectomy: RLC). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic variables. In surgical variables, the median surgical times differed significantly: 198 min (SD 48 min) for LLC vs. 246 min (SD 72 min) for RLC (p = 0.01, 95% CI: - 75.2 to - 20.5)). The only significant difference regarding postoperative complications was a higher degree of relevant morbidity in the LLC (Clavien-Dindo > II (14.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.03) and Comprehensive Complication Index (IQR 22 vs. IQR 0, p = 0.03). The pathological results were similar in both approaches.
conclusionLaparoscopic and robotic intracorporeal resection and anastomosis are feasible and safe, and obtain similar surgical, postoperative, and pathological results than described in literature. However, morbidity seems to be higher in LLC group with fewer relevant postoperative complications. The results of this study enable us to proceed to stage 2b of the IDEAL framework. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: The study is registered in Clinical trials with the registration code NCT0445693.
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.