ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025
Short- and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Restorative resection in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe lateral pelvic cavity is an anatomically tricky site to access using a linear approach; therefore, robot-assisted lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) may be superior over existing laparoscopic procedures. In this study, we aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted LLND (R-LLND) versus laparoscopic LLND (L-LLND) for locally advanced low rectal cancer and explore the potential advantages of robot-assisted surgery.
methodsThis single-center, retrospective cohort study included patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent minimally invasive total mesorectal excision (TME) plus LLND for low rectal adenocarcinoma. Patients were divided into L-LLND and R-LLND groups. The short- and long-term outcomes of the procedures were compared.
resultsThere were 41 patients in the L-LLND group and 21 in the R-LLND group. The incidence of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the R-LLND group (49% vs. 19%, p = 0.029), especially urinary retention (29% vs. 5%, p = 0.046). The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the R-LLND group (22 vs. 15 days, p < 0.001). The 3-year relapse-free survival rates in the L-LLND and R-LLND groups were 75.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.9-85.9) and 65.7% (95% CI: 30.7-86.1), respectively. No significant differences were observed in long-term survival outcomes.
conclusionPatients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent TME plus R-LLND had a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications and a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay compared to those who underwent TME plus L-LLND. The long-term outcomes were comparable, and no oncological concerns associated with R-LLND were observed.
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.