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.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Standardisation in robotic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for IBD: a case-matched comparison during the learning curve.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Reduced conversion and readmission rates in robotic ileocecal resection for Crohn's disease: a propensity-matched analysis of the Hugo™ RAS system.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: an analysis of the Nationwide readmission database, 2016-2020.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Initial experience in colorectal robotic surgery in a university hospital: the first 100 consecutive cases using Hugo™ RAS platform.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Multicenter international experience with the Hugo™ RAS platform in colorectal surgery: reproducibility and real-world outcomes from the COLOROBOT IBERICA study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Functional, oncologic and clinical outcomes of robotic rectal resection using the Hugo™ RAS system versus laparoscopic surgery: A comparative cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Observational
- 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 · 2025Article
- Application of the Hugo™ RAS robotic system in general surgery: a scoping review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Robotic proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a hybrid approach.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- A multi-docking strategy for robotic LAR and deep pelvic surgery with the Hugo RAS system: experience from a tertiary referral center.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
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.