SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative effectiveness and short-term outcomes of the KangDuo and da Vinci robotic platforms in colorectal cancer surgery.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The KangDuo Surgical Robot-01 (KD-SR-01) was developed as a lower-cost alternative, but its perioperative performance relative to da Vinci remains uncertain. This study aims to compare operative efficiency and perioperative safety between the KD-SR-01 and da Vinci systems in colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. A PROSPERO-registered systematic review (CRD420251082786) searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to 28 June 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohort studies involving adult CRC patients treated with both robotic platforms were eligible. Primary outcomes were operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), and docking time; postoperative complications were analysed as secondary outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis generated weighted mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study quality was appraised with ROBINS-I and Cochrane RoB 2 tools. Four studies (2 RCTs, 2 cohorts) enrolling 273 patients (KD-SR-01 = 136; da Vinci = 137) met the criteria. KD-SR-01 was associated with a longer OT (WMD = 25.51 min, 95% CI 11.05-39.96), but a shorter docking time (WMD = - 0.84 min, 95% CI - 1.58 to - 0.10). No significant differences were observed in EBL (WMD = 8.62 mL, 95% CI - 9.02 to 26.26) or in the rate of postoperative complications (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.49-2.21). Cohort studies showed moderate risk of bias; RCTs were judged as low risk or had some concerns. The KD-SR-01 system showed similar intraoperative blood loss, docking time, and safety outcomes compared to the da Vinci platform. However, operative time was significantly longer, which may affect clinical workflow and should be considered in platform selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40908423What 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.