SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2024
A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes comparing the efficacy of robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery in obese patients.
Synthesis 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, 4 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analysis with comparison against published systematic reviews.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Is robotic colorectal surgery worth the cost? An umbrella review integrating clinical outcomes, learning curve, and economic evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The perioperative results of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in obese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Influence of BMI on robotic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Short-term outcomes of KangDuo surgical robot- versus Da Vinci surgical robot-assisted radical resection of colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2025Trial
- Impact of BMI on robotic rectal cancer surgery versus three-dimensional laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a retrospective study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- 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
- The promises and challenges of robotic-assisted surgery in regional Australia.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Robotic right colectomy is associated with reduced conversion to open surgery in patients with obesity.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2025Article
- Outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery across body mass index subgroups for colon and rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Does robotic assisted surgery mitigate obesity related systemic inflammatory response and clinical outcomes in left sided colorectal cancer resections?Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Emergency robotic surgery: the experience of a single center and review of the literature.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2024Review
- Comment on: "A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes comparing the efficacy of robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery in obese patients".Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Benefits of laparoscopic liver resection for liver tumors in obese patients: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate and contrast the effectiveness of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the treatment of obese patients. In February 2024, we carried out an exhaustive search of key global databases including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar, limiting our focus to studies published in English and Chinese. We excluded reviews, protocols lacking published results, articles derived solely from conference abstracts, and studies not relevant to our research objectives. To analyze categorical variables, we utilized the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method along with random-effects models, calculating inverse variances and presenting the outcomes as odds ratios (ORs) along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical significance was determined when p values were less than 0.05. In our final meta-analysis, we included eight cohort studies, encompassing a total of 5,004 patients. When comparing the robotic surgery group to the laparoscopic group, the findings revealed that the robotic group experienced a longer operative time (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 37.53 min, 95% (CI) 15.58-59.47; p = 0.0008), a shorter hospital stay (WMD = -0.68 days, 95% CI -1.25 to -0.10; p = 0.02), and reduced blood loss (WMD = -49.23 mL, 95% CI -64.31 to -34.14; p < 0.00001). No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding overall complications, conversion rates, surgical site infections, readmission rates, lymph node yield, anastomotic leakage, and intestinal obstruction. The results of our study indicate that robot-assisted colorectal surgery offers benefits for obese patients by shortening the length of hospital stay and minimizing blood loss when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Nonetheless, it is associated with longer operation times and shows no significant difference in terms of overall complications, conversion rates, rehospitalization rates, and other similar metrics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38592362What 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.