ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a retrospective study of 672 patients.
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 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of perioperative outcomes and oncological efficacy between Da Vinci Si and Da Vinci Xi robotic systems in colorectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Applicability and results of the versius surgical robotic system in colorectal surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of Perioperative, Oncologic, and Functional Outcomes Following Robotic and Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for IBD: a case-matched comparison during the learning curve.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- The Shifting and Evolving Neoadjuvant Treatments and Surgical Platforms on Oncological Outcomes and Sphincter Preservation in Distal Rectal Cancer: A 23-Year Retrospective Experience.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Construction of a risk factor prediction model for postoperative complications in elderly patients with colorectal cancer using machine learning.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The short-term effect of Da Vinci's robot total mesorectal excision with preserving the left colic artery.Medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted sugery for rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant therapy: a large volume single center experience.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Prognostic Impact of C-reactive Protein-albumin-lymphocyte Index in Elderly Patients with Colorectal Cancer.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2025Article
- Prognostic value of preoperative D-dimer to albumin ratio in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- Significant Pathologic Response Following Neoadjuvant Therapy and Curative Resection in Patients With Rectal Cancer: Surgical and Oncological Outcomes From a Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Comparing total mesorectal excision with partial mesorectal excision for proximal rectal cancer: evaluating postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Development and validation of machine learning models and nomograms for predicting the surgical difficulty of laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a comparative study on surgical safety and functional outcomes.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although there's growing information about the long-term oncological effects of robotic surgery for rectal cancer, the procedure is still relatively new. This study aimed to assess the long-term oncological results of total mesorectal excision (TME) performed laparoscopically versus robotically in the setting of rectal cancer. Restrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. A total of 489 laparoscopic (L-TME) and 183 robotic total mesorectal excisions (R-TME) were carried out by a single surgeon between 2013 and 2023. The groups were compared in terms of perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. In the R-TME and L-TME groups, male sex predominated (75.4% and 57.3%, respectively), although the robotic group was significantly greater (p = 0.008). There was no conversion in R-TME group, whereas three (0.6%) converted to open surgery in L-TME group. The R-TME group had a statistically significant higher number of distal rectal tumors (85%) compared to the L-TME group (54.6%). Only three (1.7%) patients in the R-TME group received abdomineperineal resection (APR); in contrast, 25 (5%) patients in the L-TME group received APR (p < 0.001). For R-TME, the mean follow-up was 70.7 months (range 18-138) and for L-TME, it was 60 months (range 14-140). Frequency of completed mesorectum was significantly greater in R-TME group (98.9% vs 94.2%, p < 0.001). The 5 year overall survival rates for R-TME and L-TME groups were 89.6% and 88.7%, respectively. The 5 year disease-free survival for R-TME and L-TME groups were 84.1% and 81.1%, respectively. The local recurrences rates were 7.6% and 6.3%, respectively in R-TME and L-TME groups (p = 0.274). R-TME is characterized by no conversion and improved mesorectal integrity. R-TME had longer operation time. The long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38554211What 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.