Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39507270›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2024

Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes.

Bruno Augusto Alves Martins, Nicolas Avellaneda, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Short- and long-term outcomes of IPAA for ulcerative colitis in Latin America: A retrospective, multicentre assessment.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Colorectal surgery simulation in realistic models: experience of Brazilian residents.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026
    Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Bruno Augusto Alves MartinsDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Hospital Universitário de Brasília, Brasilia, Brazil.
Nicolas AvellanedaDepartment of General Surgery and Academic Investigations Unit, CEMIC University Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Guglielmo Niccolò PiozziDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objectives: Robotic approach in colorectal surgery is rapidly gaining interest, particularly in the context of rectal cancer resection. Despite economic barriers, substantial proliferation of robotic colorectal procedures has been observed throughout Latin America. However, there is a lack of data regarding intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, as well as oncological and long-term results. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal approaches across Latin America. Material and methods: A systematic literature search of electronic databases, including PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Scielo, was performed and reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The main target of the literature search was studies that reported outcomes of colorectal robotic surgery in Latin America. Results: A total of 9,694 published articles were identified from the initial search. Nine thousand six hundred thirty-six publications were excluded after title and abstract review and removal of duplicates. Fifty-eight articles were thoroughly reviewed, and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The critical appraisal of study quality (biases risk assessment) was performed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis. In general, the overall study quality was poor. Of the 11 studies included in the analysis, ten addressed intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, seven addressed oncological/pathological outcomes, and just one addressed long-term outcomes. Ten studies evaluated intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, encompassing a total of 425 patients, the majority of whom were diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Morbidity rates exhibited a range between 0% and 45.9%, while mortality ranged from 0% to 2.5%. Conclusion: Few studies have been published addressing intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and oncological outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery in this region. Undoubtedly, there are unique challenges not encountered by developed countries, including economic obstacles in establishing structured training programmes and high-quality centres for the development of robotic surgery. Further studies are needed to assess the real extent of robotic surgery in the region and its results. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42023494112).

Indexed as

colorectal surgeryLatin Americaminimally invasive surgical proceduresrobotic surgical proceduresrobotic training

Identifiers

PMID39507270
PMCPMC11538505

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.