Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39485536›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025

Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Yasuyuki Takamizawa, Shunsuke Tsukamoto, Takeharu Kato, Hiroshi Nagata, Konosuke Moritani, Yukihide Kanemitsu

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. On the edge: pathology specimen quality in robotic and laparoscopic proctectomy, a propensity score-matched study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Influence of computed tomography-based pelvimetric parameters and surgical approaches on surgical difficulty in mid‑low rectal cancer.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Yasuyuki TakamizawaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan. ytakamiz@ncc.go.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-9751-3309
Shunsuke TsukamotoDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Takeharu KatoDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Hiroshi NagataDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Konosuke MoritaniDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Yukihide KanemitsuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe relative benefits of robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery are controversial in rectal cancer. This study compared the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery with those of laparoscopic surgery in patients with rectal cancer using propensity score analysis.

methodsThis study analyzed consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for stage I-III rectal cancer between April 2014 and October 2020. After propensity score matching (PSM), short-term outcomes, relapse-free survival, and overall survival were compared between the robotic surgery (RS) group and the laparoscopic surgery (LS) group.

resultsDuring the study period, 251 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 193 underwent robotic surgery. PSM resulted in 160 matched pairs (After PSM, the percentages of patients with stage I, II, and III disease were respectively 56%, 19%, and 24% in the LS group and 49%, 23%, and 28% in the RS group (P = 0.462). Median operation time was 239 min in the LS group and 284 min in the RS group (P = 0.001). The C-reactive protein level on postoperative day 3 was significantly lower in the RS group (4.63 mg/mL vs. 5.86 mg/mL, P = 0.013). Postoperative complications, including ileus and Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher complications, were 6% vs. 1% (P = 0.006) and 21% vs. 12% (P = 0.024) in the LS and RS groups, respectively. The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 88.5% in the LS group and 90.5% in the RS group (P = 0.525); the respective 5-year overall survival rates were 97.3 and 93.8% (P = 0.283). The 5-year cumulative local and distant recurrence rates were 3.3% vs. 3.3% (P = 0.665) and 9.7% vs. 7.7% (P = 0.464) in the LS and RS groups, respectively

conclusionRobotic surgery can be a feasible treatment modality for rectal cancer, with lower frequencies of postoperative ileus and Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher complications than laparoscopic surgery and no difference in long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyOperative TimePropensity ScoreRectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic surgeryPostoperative outcomesPropensity score analysisRectal cancerRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID39485536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.