ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
A Synchronous Robotic Resection of Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases-Our Initial Experience.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus Open for Simultaneous Surgery of Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Safety of Simultaneous Robot-Assisted Resection of Colorectal Malignancy and Synchronous Liver Metastases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Conversion following minimally invasive attempt at simultaneous colorectal and liver resection does not affect 30-day postoperative overall morbidity.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSynchronous robotic colorectal and liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is gaining popularity. This case series describes our initial institutional experience.
methodsA retrospective study of synchronous robotic colorectal and liver resections for metastatic colorectal cancer (March 2020 to December 2021).
resultsEight patients underwent synchronous robotic resections. The median age was 59 (45-72), and the median body mass index was 29 (20-33). Seven received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and five rectal cancers received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. One patient had a low anterior resection with major hepatectomy, two had low anterior resection with minor hepatectomy, and one had abdominoperineal resection with major hepatectomy. One patient had a left colectomy with minor hepatectomy, and two had right colectomies with minor hepatectomy. We used five robotic 8/12 mm ports in all cases. Extraction incisions were Pfannenstiel in four patients, colostomy site in two patients, one perineal incision, and one supra-umbilical incision. The median estimated blood loss was 200 mL (25-500), and the median operative time was 448 min (374-576). There were no intra-operative complications or conversions. Five patients had the liver resection first, and two of six anastomoses were performed before the liver resection. The Median length of stay was 4 days (3-14). There were two post-operative complications, prolonged ileus and DVT, with a Clavien-Dindo complication grade of I and II, respectively. There were no readmissions or reoperations. All colorectal and liver resection margins were negative.
conclusionsSynchronous robotic colorectal and liver resection can be performed effectively utilizing one port configuration with acceptable short-term outcomes and quality of oncologic resection.
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.