Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38907844›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2024

Urinary and sexual function after robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lei Zhu, Xiaosong Li, Hao Zhang, Hang Li, Xiping Shen

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Lei ZhuDepartment of General Surgery, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China.
Xiaosong LiDepartment of General Surgery, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China.
Hao ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China.
Hang LiDepartment of General Surgery, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China. lihangdenghehe@163.com.
Xiping ShenDepartment of General Surgery, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, 215000, Jiangsu, China. shenxiping2022@163.com.

Funding

The Health Science and Technology Innovation Project of Suzhou Science and Technology Bureau SKYD2022068The Scientific Research Foundation of Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University YK202201The Scientific Research Foundation of Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University YK202409
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to compare the protective effects of robotic rectal cancer surgery (RRCS) and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery (LRCS) on urinary and sexual function of patients. We conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase for studies comparing the impact of RRCS and LRCS on urinary function and sexual function. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and the Female Sexual Function Index(FSFI) were used to evaluate the urinary function and sexual function of patients. A total of 13 studies comprising 1964 patients were included in this meta-analysis, including 3 randomized controlled trials, 5 retrospective cohort studies, 3 prospective cohort studies, and 2 propensity score-matched studies. Nine hundred and fifty-nine patients underwent RRCS and 1005 patients underwent LRCS. Statistical analysis of the IPSS scores indicated urinary function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively [mean difference (MD), - 1.06, 95% CI - 1.85 to - 0.28; and MD, - 0.96, 95% CI - 1.60 to - 0.32; and MD, - 1.09, 95% CI - 1.72 to - 0.46]. Statistical analysis of the IIEF-5 scores indicated male sexual function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively (MD, 1.76, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.72; and MD, 1.83, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.33; and MD, 1.05, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.01). Statistical analysis of the FSFI scores indicated female sexual function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (MD, 2.86; 95% CI 1.38 to 4.35; and MD, 4.19; 95% CI 1.85 to 6.54). RRCS is more favorable than LRCS in preserving the urinary and sexual function of patients with rectal cancer.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresErectile DysfunctionFemaleHumansMalePostoperative ComplicationsSexual Dysfunction, PhysiologicalUrinationLaparoscopic surgeryRectal cancerRobotic surgerySexual functionUrinary function

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.