Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38406010›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Precision Versus Practicality: A Comprehensive Analysis of Robotic Right Colectomy Versus Laparoscopic Right Colectomy, Future Directions, Biases, Research Gaps, and Their Implications.

Konstantinos Kossenas, Ioannis Karamatzanis, Olga Moutzouri, Beatrice Catalli, Andreas I Biris, Dimitra Dimaki, Ifigeneia Kokkofiti, Filippos Georgopoulos

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Konstantinos KossenasSurgery, University of Nicosia Medical School, Nicosia, CYP.
Ioannis KaramatzanisInternal Medicine, Basildon University Hospital, Basildon, GBR.
Olga MoutzouriMedicine, University of Nicosia Medical School, Nicosia, CYP.
Beatrice CatalliPediatrics, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, Rome, ITA.
Andreas I BirisMedicine, NHS Scotland, Edinburgh, GBR.
Dimitra DimakiMedicine, University of Nicosia Medical School, Nicosia, CYP.
Ifigeneia KokkofitiMedicine, University of Nicosia Medical School, Nicosia, CYP.
Filippos GeorgopoulosGastroenterology, Al Zahra Hospital, Dubai, ARE.
Basildon Hospital · GBDubai Hospital · AEBambino Gesù Children's Hospital · ITNational Health Service Scotland · GBNHS Education for Scotland · GBUniversity of Nicosia · CY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world and second in cancer-related mortality. It is most prevalent in the developed world and is often associated with lifestyle factors along with age and genetics. The inclusion criteria comprised high-level evidence, such as randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews, conducted between 2012 and 2023, that directly compared the two approaches. The review reveals mixed outcomes between robotic right colectomy (RRC) and laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). The robotic approach was associated with longer operative duration and higher costs but with decreased blood loss and quicker recovery compared to laparoscopy. On the other hand, no major differences were observed regarding lymph node retrieval, duration of hospitalization, and surgical complications. Regarding future directions, it is evident that the focus needs to shift beyond the operative parameters and to patient-centered outcomes, which are underreported. Also, more randomized clinical trials are required, focusing on safety, efficacy, and long-term quality of life. Costs-benefit analyses are required to weigh the benefits of robotic surgery against the implementation and practice costs. Additionally, improvements in surgeons' training may be necessary to reduce the operative duration and potentially decrease operational costs. Finally, standardization of research protocols may be necessary to reduce biases.

Indexed as

colectomycolorectal cancerlaparoscopic surgeryrobotic surgerysurgical outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38406010
PMCPMC10892367
OpenAlexW4391223559

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.