Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38459408›Full record

SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2024

Could robotic-assisted surgery reduce mesh-related complications after ventral mesh rectopexy? Experience of a tertiary centre and systematic review of the literature.

Necdet F Yasar, Weam Waked, Alessandro Sturiale, Bernardina Fabiani, Gabriele Naldini

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Could robotic-assisted surgery reduce mesh-related complications after ventral mesh rectopexy? Experience of a tertiary centre and systematic review of the literature.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Necdet F YasarDepartment of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-9751-2912
Weam WakedDepartment of General Surgery, Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.
Alessandro SturialeProctology and Perineal Surgical Unit, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0845-0933
Bernardina FabianiProctology and Perineal Surgical Unit, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.
Gabriele NaldiniProctology and Perineal Surgical Unit, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9252-1377
Ospedale Cisanello · ITBnai Zion Medical Center · ILEskişehir Osmangazi University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe development of robotic assistance has made dissection and suturing in the deep pelvis much easier. The augmented quality of the images and the articulation of the robotic arms have also enabled a more precise dissection. The aim of this study is to present the data on robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy procedures in a university hospital and examine the literature in terms of mesh erosion.

methodThe electronic databases Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane were searched. Studies from January 2004 until January 2023 in the English language were included. Studies which included fewer than 10 patients were excluded. Laparoscopic or robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexies were included. Mesh erosion rates following laparoscopic or robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexies were measured.

resultsOverall, the systematic review presents 5911 patients from 43 studies who underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy compared with 746 patients treated with robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy from six studies and our centre. Mesh erosion was rare in both groups; however, the prevalence was greater in the laparoscopy group (0.90% vs. 0.27%).

conclusionThe mesh erosion rates are very low with robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy. For precise results, more studies and experience in robotic surgery are required.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPostoperative ComplicationsRectal ProlapseRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgical MeshAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRectumTertiary Care Centerslaparoscopymesh erosionrobotic surgeryventral mesh rectopexy

Identifiers

PMID38459408
PMCPMC12150831
OpenAlexW4392630506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.