Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38265492›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2024

Preserving vascular integrity during totally robotic sigmoidectomy: unleashing the power of vessel-sparing precision.

C G S Huscher, F Cobellis, G Lazzarin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

C G S HuscherDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Robotic and New Technology, Casa Di Cura Cobellis, Vallo Della Lucania, SA, Italy.
F CobellisDepartment of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
G LazzarinDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Robotic and New Technology, Casa Di Cura Cobellis, Vallo Della Lucania, SA, Italy. gialazzarin@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study assesses the feasibility, safety, and clinical utility of vessel-sparing approach in totally robotic sigmoidectomy for adenocarcinoma. MATERIAL AND

methodsA comprehensive protocol for completely vessel-sparing robotic sigmoidectomy (VsRS) was established at the authors' institution from January 2019 through December 2020. Surgical and pathological outcomes were indagated and compared with results of current literature.

resultsThe study population consisted of 34 patients. The median number of examined lymph nodes (ELN) was 21 (range 15-28); the median number of positive lymph nodes (PLN) was 0 (range 0-8). Mean operative time was 240 min (sd 43.56, range 180-360 min), and conversion to open rate was 0%. Anastomotic leak rate was 0%. The median follow-up period was 28 months

conclusionThis pilot series represents a significant step forward in the development of completely vessel-sparing sigmoidectomy for adenocarcinoma. The study demonstrates the safety and feasibility of this innovative approach, which aims to achieve oncological radicality while preserving vital vascular structures. Notably, the postoperative outcomes observed in this study were comparable to those reported in the existing literature for the current standard of care at high-volume centers. Nevertheless, further validation through prospective and controlled investigations is essential before this technique can be fully incorporated into clinical practice.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaRobotic Surgical ProceduresAnastomotic LeakHumansLymph NodesProspective StudiesCompletely robotic sigmoidectomyRobotic-sewn anastomosisVessel-sparing sigmoidectomy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.