ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Robotic intracorporeal single-stapling versus double-stapling anastomosis in left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-weighted pilot study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic Intracorporeal Single-Stapled Anastomosis (RiSSA): Indications, Technical Benefits, and Current Limitations.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Review
- Single-Stapled Double Purse-String Anastomotic (SIA) Technique in Robotic Malignant Sigmoid Resections-A Danish Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Mapping the knowledge landscape of robotic colorectal cancer surgery: a visualization study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Comment on "Robotic intracorporeal single-stapling versus double-stapling anastomosis in left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-weighted pilot study".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Surgical resection is still the mainstay treatment for malignancies situated in the left colon and rectum. Selection of the anastomosis method significantly affects patient recovery and the likelihood of postoperative complications. In this pilot study, we compare early clinical results between two robotic anastomosis techniques, intracorporeal single-stapling (RiSSA) and extracorporeal double-stapling (DSA), used in robotic surgeries for left-sided colorectal cancer.A total of 49 consecutive patients underwent curative-intent robotic procedures at a tertiary academic hospital in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, from May 2023 to February 2025. Of these, 31 patients received the RiSSA technique, while 18 underwent DSA for anastomosis. Baseline differences were accounted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Patients undergoing RiSSA experienced shorter surgery times, faster gastrointestinal recovery, reduced hospital stays, and fewer diverting stomas. While the RiSSA group had a lower anastomotic leakage rate (0% compared to 9.5%), this difference did not reach statistical significance. Additional sensitivity analyses reinforced the robustness of the findings. Despite inherent limitations, such as its retrospective design, modest sample size, selection bias, and possible operator learning curve, this exploratory analysis supports the notion that RiSSA may represent a viable and safe alternative to conventional extracorporeal techniques, with potential benefits in short-term postoperative outcomes. Further prospective studies are required to validate these initial findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40715693What 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.