Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38716210›Full record

ArticleTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2024

Cost-comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal resections: a mapped systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies.

Anurag Singh, Mandeep Kaur, Mirza K Baig, Christie Swaminathan, Atreya Subramanian, Muhammad S Sajid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

6 authors.

Anurag SinghDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7896-6310
Mandeep KaurDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8200-0896
Mirza K BaigDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, UK.
Christie SwaminathanDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.
Atreya SubramanianDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1619-8202
Muhammad S SajidDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Robotic colorectal resections (RCR) have been gaining popularity recently due to several advantages in addition to oncological safety. The objective of this review is to evaluate the cost comparison of RCR versus laparoscopic colorectal resections (LCR). Methods: All types of comparative studies reporting the cost of RCR versus LCR were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and analysis was conducted by using the principles of meta-analysis on the statistical software RevMan version 5. Results: The search of medical databases yielded 13 studies (one randomised trial and 12 comparative studies) on 16,082 patients undergoing oncological and non-oncological colorectal resections. Eleven studies reported total cost whereas seven studies reported only operative cost. In the random effects model analysis, LCR was associated with the reduced total cost [standardised mean difference -62.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): -75.14 to -49.54, Z=9.55, P<0.001] as well as reduced operative cost (standardised mean difference -4.60, 95% CI: -5.90 to -3.31, Z=6.96, P<0.001) compared to RCR. However, there was significant heterogeneity [Tau Conclusions: The LCR seems to be more economical as compared to the RCR in terms of operative cost as well as total cost (operative plus in-patient stay). However, due to statistically significant heterogeneity among included studies and paucity of the randomised trials, these findings should be taken cautiously.

Indexed as

cost analysisLaparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCR)robotic colorectal surgery (RCR)

Identifiers

PMID38716210
PMCPMC11074490

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.