Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40138014›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2025

The outcomes of robotic ileocolic resection in Crohn's disease compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

M Flaifel, S Eichenberg, B Mohandes, E Taha, L Kollmann, S Flemming, A Haberstroh, N Ortlieb, N Melling, K Neumann and 9 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

19 authors.

M FlaifelSchool of Medicine, St. George's University of London, London, UK.
S EichenbergDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baselland, Basel, Switzerland.
B MohandesDepartment of General Surgery, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
E TahaDepartment of Visceral, Gynecology and Pediatric Surgery, Al Qassim Health Cluster, Buraydah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
L KollmannDepartment for General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
S FlemmingDepartment for General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
A HaberstrohLaupus Health Sciences Library, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA.
N OrtliebData Science and Statistics, Medoc Swiss, Basel, Switzerland.
N MellingDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
K NeumannDepartment of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
S Taha-MehlitzClarunis, Department of Visceral Surgery, University Centre for Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, St. Clara Hospital and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
T PoškusInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Vilnius University Hospital, Vilnius, Lithuania.
D M FreyDepartment of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
P C CattinDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Allschwil, Switzerland.
A TahaDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baselland, Basel, Switzerland. tahaa23@ecu.edu.
J ZeindlerDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baselland, Basel, Switzerland.
R RosenbergDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Baselland, Basel, Switzerland.
B SaadDepartment of Acute Medicine, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK.
M D Honaker *Department of Surgery, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is the first review providing insights into the outcomes of robotic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease, potentially guiding improved surgical decisions and patient outcomes and comparing outcomes with laparoscopic and open approaches.

methodsThe review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42024504839). A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central databases for studies on robotic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease from inception to February 2024 was conducted. Eligible studies included participants over 18 years of age with Crohn's disease undergoing robotic ileocolic resection. Data were extracted according to PRISMA guidelines. For single-arm analyses, the random-effects model was used, while two-arm analyses employed the inverse variance and Mantel-Haenszel methods.

resultsThe analysis included eight studies with 5760 patients, among whom 369 underwent robotic ileocolic resection. The mean operative time for robotic procedures was 226 min. Postoperative complications included ileus in 12.50% and wound complications in 7.00%, while reoperations and readmissions occurred in 3.60% and 13.20% of patients, respectively. When compared with laparoscopic procedures, robotic procedures showed shorter length of hospital stay and longer operative times but similar total complication, reoperation, and conversion rates. In contrast, robotic procedures had fewer total postoperative complications compared with open surgeries, despite longer operative times.

conclusionsRobotic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease, while having a longer operative time, results in fewer postoperative complications compared with open surgery and shows comparable outcomes to laparoscopic procedures with shorter hospital stays.

Indexed as

ColectomyColonCrohn DiseaseIleumLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsReoperationTreatment OutcomeCrohn’s diseaseIleocolic resectionLaparoscopic surgeryMeta-analysisRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID40138014
PMCPMC11946954

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.