ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Comparison of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through for anorectal malformations: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Comparative study of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectovestibular fistula.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of robotic-assisted anorectal pull-through (RAARP) and laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through (LAARP) in treating children with anorectal malformations (ARMs).
methodsSixty five children with ARMs who underwent surgical treatment in our department between 2018 and 2023 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups based on surgical approach: 27 cases in the RAARP group and 38 in the LAARP group. The collected data included age and weight at surgery, operation time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative hospital stay,postoperative complications and postoperative defecation function.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in age at surgery, weight at surgery, operative time, or postoperative hospital stay (P > 0.05). the intraoperative blood loss in the RAARP group were significantly lower than that in the LAARP group (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was observed in the complication rates between the two groups (P > 0.05). The total hospitalization cost in the RAARP group were significantly higher than LAARP group (P < 0.05). The RAARP group demonstrated significantly better postoperative defecation function, including voluntary bowel control and soiling, compared to the LAARP group (P < 0.05), However, no significant difference was observed in the incidence of constipation (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe application of RAARP in the treatment of intermediate/high-type anorectal malformations with rectourethral bulbar fistula demonstrates safety and efficacy, effectively reducing intraoperative blood loss while maintaining postoperative defecation function comparable to or better than LAARP, with satisfactory early-term outcomes.RAARP also represents a safe and feasible option for the treatment of low-type fistulous anorectal malformations, warranting consideration for clinical application.
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.