ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2024
Robotic resection of presacral tumors.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safe robotic resection of a rare low-grade pelvic presacral mesenchymal tumor - case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- A multi-docking strategy for robotic LAR and deep pelvic surgery with the Hugo RAS system: experience from a tertiary referral center.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPresacral tumors are a rare entity typically treated with an open surgical approach. A limited number of minimally invasive resections have been described. The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of roboticresection of presacral tumors.
methodsThis is a retrospective single system analysis, conducted at a quaternary referral academic healthcare system, and included all patients who underwent a robotic excision of a presacral tumor between 2015 and 2023. Outcomes of interest were operative time, estimated blood loss, complications, length of stay, margin status, and recurrence rates.
resultsSixteen patients (11 females and 5 males) were included. The median age of the cohort was 51 years (range 25-69 years). The median operative time was 197 min (range 98-802 min). The median estimated blood loss was 40 ml, ranging from 0 to 1800 ml, with one patient experiencing conversion to open surgery after uncontrolled hemorrhage. Urinary retention was the only postoperative complication that occurred in three patients (19%) and was solved within 30 days in all cases. The median length of stay was one day (range 1-6 days). The median follow-up was 6.7 months (range 1-110 months). All tumors were excised with appropriate margins, but one benign and one malignant tumor recurred (12.5%). Ten tumors were classified as congenital (one was malignant), two were mesenchymal (both malignant), and five were miscellaneous (one malignant).
conclusionsRobotic resection of select presacral pathology is feasible and safe. Further studies must be conducted to determine complication rates, outcomes, and long-term safety profiles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38653930What 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.