ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Comparative Outcomes of Robot-assisted
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimWhile some research has revealed the potential short-term advantages of robot-assisted low anterior resection (LAR) in patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer, studies focusing on the permanent stoma rate remain limited. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis on a continuous series of patients with non-metastatic mid-to-low rectal cancer. Between 2016 and 2020, these patients underwent either robot-assisted or traditional laparoscopic LAR at a single center. We used a propensity score matching technique, and the participants were matched in a 1:2 ratio and a caliper of 0.05.
resultsAfter matching, our cohort consisted of 44 patients from the robot-assisted LAR group and 88 from the laparoscopic LAR group. The long-term results, such as overall survival, cancer-free survival, and local and distant recurrence rates were similar between the two groups. However, the robot-assisted group exhibited a notably shorter average post-surgery hospitalization (10.8
conclusionIn patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer, robot-assisted LAR, despite comparable long-term survival and recurrence rates, displayed reduced complications, including fewer instances of anastomotic leakage and permanent stoma requirements than its laparoscopic counterpart. These findings imply the potential superiority of robot-assisted surgical techniques for mid-to-low rectal patients.
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.