ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for middle or lower rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe potential benefits of robotic surgery (RS) for rectal cancer (RC) remain uncertain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of RS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) for stage I-III middle or lower RC.
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed 350 consecutive patients with stage I-III middle or lower RC who underwent curative surgery from 2017 to 2021, employing propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.
resultsOf 350 patients, 128 patients underwent RS. After PSM, we enrolled 256 patients. Median follow-up was 59.8 months. Before PSM, significant differences were observed between groups regarding primary tumor site (p = 0.02). After PSM, no significant differences between groups were observed in terms of operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, intra-operative and postoperative complications, or number of lymph nodes harvested. After PSM, 3- and 5-year cumulative LR rates were 3.2% and 3.2% in the RS group, and 2.8% and 3.2% in the LS group, respectively. The cumulative distant recurrence (DR) rates in the RS group were 13.4% at 3-year and 15.1% at 5-year, whereas in the LS group, they were 14.9% and 18.7%, respectively. No notable differences in cumulative LR or DR rates were evident between groups. Furthermore, no notable differences were observed between groups regarding overall, cancer-specific, or recurrence-free survival according to stage.
conclusionsRS appears to be viable and safe treatment approach for patients with middle or lower RC, offering short- and long-term outcomes comparable to those of LS.
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.