Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37763064›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023

Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Intra- and Post-Operative Complications.

Carmine Iacovazzo, Pasquale Buonanno, Maria Massaro, Marilena Ianniello, Andrea Uriel de Siena, Maria Vargas, Annachiara Marra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

7 authors.

Carmine IacovazzoDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Pasquale BuonannoDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7933-6209
Maria MassaroDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0009-0006-0469-9607
Marilena IannielloDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9336-5807
Andrea Uriel de SienaDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7909-1387
Maria VargasDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Annachiara MarraDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples, Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of robotic surgery is attracting ever-growing interest for its potential advantages such as small incisions, fine movements, and magnification of the operating field. Only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the differences in perioperative outcomes between the two approaches.

methodsWe screened the main online databases from inception to May 2023. We included studies in English enrolling adult patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. We used the following exclusion criteria: surgery with the involvement of thoracic esophagus, and patients affected by severe heart, pulmonary and end-stage renal disease. We compared intra- and post-operative complications, length of hospitalization, and costs between laparoscopic and robotic approaches.

resultsA total of 18 RCTs were included. We found no differences in the rate of anastomotic leakage, cardiovascular complications, estimated blood loss, readmission, deep vein thrombosis, length of hospitalization, mortality, and post-operative pain between robotic and laparoscopic surgery; post-operative pneumonia was less frequent in the robotic approach. The conversion to open surgery was less frequent in the robotic approach, which was characterized by shorter time to first flatus but higher operative time and costs.

conclusionsThe robotic gastrointestinal surgery has some advantages compared to the laparoscopic technique such as lower conversion rate, faster recovery of bowel movement, but it has higher economic costs.

Indexed as

colorectalgastricminimally invasive surgeryrobotic-assisted surgerysurgery complications

Identifiers

PMID37763064
PMCPMC10532788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.