Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40922920›Full record

ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2025

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

Marie Hanaoka, Hiroyasu Kagawa, Ataru Igarashi, Hiroshi Yoshihara, Shinichi Yamauchi, Masanori Tokunaga, Lin Peng-Lin, Minkyung Shin, Yusuke Kinugasa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Essential Updates 2024-2026: Advances in Colorectal Cancer Surgery.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Experience with hinotoriJournal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Marie HanaokaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Institute of Science Tokyo Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3380-7233
Hiroyasu KagawaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Institute of Science Tokyo Tokyo Japan.
Ataru IgarashiDepartment of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan.
Hiroshi YoshiharaDepartment of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan.
Shinichi YamauchiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Institute of Science Tokyo Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2360-5323
Masanori TokunagaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Institute of Science Tokyo Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3183-349X
Lin Peng-LinHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Intuitive Surgical Inc Sunnyvale California USA.
Minkyung ShinHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Intuitive Surgical Inc Sunnyvale California USA.
Yusuke KinugasaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Institute of Science Tokyo Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7885-2276

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Robot-assisted surgery has short-term benefits in rectal cancer surgery; however, its long-term advantages remain unclear. This study compared short- and long-term outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted rectal cancer surgeries using large-scale, database-driven evidence. Methods: Patients (28 711) diagnosed with clinical stages I-III rectal cancer who underwent rectal resection and were registered in the Japanese Medical Data Vision Co. Ltd. database were included. Open rectal resection (ORR), laparoscopic rectal resection (LRR), and robot-assisted rectal resection (RARR) were identified. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes included perioperative outcomes. Results: After applying overlap weight, the RARR, LRR, and ORR groups had 3635 (15.3%), 17 142 (72.3%), and 2935 (12.4%) patients, respectively. Among the cohort (mean age: 69.5 years), 64.9% were male, and 24.7%, 31.5%, and 43.8% had clinical stages I, II, and III, respectively. The RARR group demonstrated the lowest postoperative complication rate, 30- and 90-day mortality rates, and shortest hospital stay. The RARR group had the highest 5-year OS (95%) and RFS (93%) compared to LRR (OS: 89%, RFS: 86%) and ORR (OS: 81%, RFS: 77%; Conclusions: The RARR group demonstrated superior short- and long-term outcomes than the LRR and ORR groups, indicating robot-assisted surgery as a potential new standard treatment for rectal cancer.

Identifiers

PMID40922920
PMCPMC12414592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.