ArticleCancers2024
Impact of Robotic Assistance on Minimally Invasive Surgery for Type II Endometrial Cancer: A National Cancer Database Analysis.
Article in Cancers, 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.
- Cancer of the corpus uteri: A 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Research progress on discharge readiness service practices for patients undergoing endometrial cancer surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to compare the overall survival (OS) and surgical outcomes between conventional laparoscopy and robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) in women with type II endometrial cancer. We identified a large cohort of women who underwent hysterectomy for type II endometrial cancer between January 2010 and December 2014 using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The primary outcome was to compare the OS of conventional laparoscopy versus RAL. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission rate, 90-day mortality, rates of lymph node retrieval, rates of node positivity, and rates of conversion to laparotomy. Cohorts were compared and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine characteristics with statistically significant predictors of outcome. We identified 7168 patients with stage I-III type II endometrial cancer who had minimally invasive surgery as primary treatment between 2010 and 2014. A total of 5074 patients underwent RAL. Women who underwent RAL were less likely to have stage III disease (26.4% vs. 29.9%,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.