Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39384631›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024

Outcomes of robotic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease using the Medtronic Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgical platform: a single center experience.

Matteo Rottoli, Stefano Cardelli, Giacomo Calini, Ioana Diana Alexa, Tommaso Violante, Gilberto Poggioli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Splenic flexure resection with Hugo™ RAS: Trocar placement, docking settings, and surgical strategy.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Matteo RottoliSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. matteo.rottoli2@unibo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0278-4139
Stefano CardelliSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8870-5176
Giacomo CaliniSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. giacomo.calini2@unibo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7460-9578
Ioana Diana AlexaSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0172-6834
Tommaso ViolanteSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4439-5254
Gilberto PoggioliSurgery of the Alimentary Tract, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4309-7311

Funding

European Union - NextGenerationEU J33C22002920006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients affected by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who underwent surgery performed through laparoscopy or using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS.

methodsThis is a retrospective study from a prospectively maintained database comparing laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted surgery for IBD from 01/11/2017 to 15/04/2024. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon robotic-naïve with a large experience in laparoscopic surgery for IBD. The robotic procedures were performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS platform. Outcomes were 30-day postoperative complications, operative time, conversion rate, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate.

resultsAmong 121 consecutive patients, 80 underwent laparoscopic (LG) and 41 robotic-assisted surgery (RG). Baseline, preoperative and disease-specific characteristics were comparable except for older age (50 [38-56] vs. 38 [28-54] years; p = 0.05) and higher albumin level (42 [40-44] vs. 40 [38-42] g/L, p = 0.006) in the RG. The intracorporeal anastomosis was more frequent in the RG (80% vs. 6%; p < 0.001) with longer operative time (240 vs. 205 min; p = 0.006), while the conversion rate was not different (5% vs. 10%, p = 0.49). Surgical procedure types were equally distributed between the two groups, and the rate of intra-abdominal septic complication (IASC) was comparable across the different procedures. Postoperative complications were similar, including the rate of IASC (5% vs. 5%, p = 1), postoperative ileus (5% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.71), bleeding (2% vs. 5%, p = 0.66), and Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications (7% vs. 6%; p = 1).

conclusionIBD surgery performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS is safe and feasible, with similar postoperative outcomes when compared to the laparoscopic approach.

Indexed as

Inflammatory Bowel DiseasesLaparoscopyPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePatient ReadmissionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHugo RASInflammatory bowel diseaseOutcomeRobotic platformRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID39384631
PMCPMC11464579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.