ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Outcomes of discoid excision and segmental resection for colorectal endometriosis: robotic versus conventional laparoscopy.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic surgery and traditional laparoscopy for colorectal endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal endometriosis: perioperative outcomes in the context of #Enzian-defined anatomical complexity.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Adoption of robot-assisted surgery for hysterectomy in France: a nationwide analysis of surgical routes and length of hospital stay (2020-2024).Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Current status of robot-assisted surgery implementation in endometriosis centers: an international multicentric cross-sectional study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery for deep endometriosis with colorectal involvement is an option after medical treatment failure. Over the past decade, robotic laparoscopy has emerged as an alternative to conventional laparoscopy. We aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopy for discoid excision and segmental resection. From 2019 to 2023, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 152 consecutive patients with colorectal endometriosis who underwent robotic or conventional laparoscopy for discoid excision and colorectal resection. Ninety of the patients 152 underwent robotic surgery and 62 conventional laparoscopy. The mean total surgical room occupancy and operating times were longer in the robotic group: 270 ± 81 min vs 240 ± 79 min, p = 0.010, and 216 ± 78 min vs 190 ± 76, p = 0.027, respectively. The mean intraoperative blood loss, and the incidence of intra- and postoperative complications (according to Clavien-Dindo classification) were similar in the two groups. The mean hospital stay was greater after conventional laparoscopy (8 ± 5 vs 7 ± 4 days; p = 0.03), and the rate of persistent voiding dysfunction was higher in the conventional group (9/11, 25% vs 2/11, 5%; p = 0.01). A higher incidence of persistent voiding dysfunction was also observed after segmental resection by conventional laparoscopy (25% vs 4.8%, p = 0.01). Our results support the use of robotic surgery as an alternative to conventional laparoscopy for discoid excision and segmental resection for colorectal endometriosis.
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.