ArticleBMC surgery2024
Robotic right colectomy versus laparoscopic right colectomy in patients with right colon cancer: a comparative study.
Article in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of robotic-assisted right colectomy using the "squeezing approach".Surgery today · 2026Article
- Comparison of surgical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: a single-center cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) versus laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) in patients diagnosed with right colon cancer, given the increasing adoption of robotic surgical techniques and their potential benefits in oncologic surgery.
methodsThis retrospective comparative study included patients who underwent right colectomy at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, between January 2019 and May 2022. The primary outcomes measured were the number of lymph nodes harvested. Key secondary outcomes included the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, hospitalization costs, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Data were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for potential confounders.
resultsA total of 225 patients (aged 65.23 ± 11.45, 108 males) with right colon cancer were included, with 100 (44.4%) patients underwent RRC. Patients who underwent RRC had significantly more lymph nodes harvested (27.69 ± 12.59 vs. 24.43 ± 9.42, P = 0.028), and incurred higher total hospitalization costs compared to those with LRC (9.68 ± 7.12 vs. 5.28 ± 1.23 ten-thousand-yuan, P < 0.001). The OS and DFS were comparable between RRC and LRC (both P > 0.05) within a median follow-up of 27 (range, 9-44) months. Multivariable cox proportional hazards regression showed that patients underwent RRC had significantly higher risk for all-cause death compared with those underwent LRC [hazards ratio (HR) = 2.303, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.625-3.265, P < 0.001].
conclusionPatients underwent RRC seemed to have significantly more numbers of lymph nodes harvested and higher risk for all-cause death and higher hospitalization costs compared with those underwent LRC. These findings suggest a need for careful consideration of the benefits and risks associated with robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy in clinical practice.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.