ArticleMagyar onkologia2024
[First experience with robotic-assisted colorectal surgery].
Article in Magyar onkologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Robot-assisted surgery has been available at the National Institute of Oncology since 2022. We report on the most important parameters of the colorectal robot-assisted surgery of the first 191 patients. Robotically assisted rectal surgery was compared with our previous laparoscopic and open surgical activities. Perioperative indicators of rectal cancer patients operated laparoscopically (n=225) and open (n=213) were retrospectively compared with patients operated robotically assisted (n=140). In comparison of the three groups (laparoscopic, open, robot-assisted), robotic surgery shows a significant advantage in quality of mesorectal excision (complete TME rate 77%, 72.7% and 90%, respectively), in the days of care (median 7, 9 and 5 days, respectively), hospital readmissions (8%, 16%, 6.4%), and the rate of sphincter preservation (68%, 60% and 89.5%). As a conclusion, robotic surgery is sufficiently safe from oncological point of view. It has a significant advantage in quality of lymph node dissection, shorter care, fewer hospital readmissions, partially lower morbidity rate and a higher sphincter preservation rate compared to laparoscopic and open surgeries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39299692PMC11870686What 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.