Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41316150›Full record

SynthesisBMC surgery2025

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy with complete mesocolon excision for right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mohamed Ali Chaouch, Amine Gouader, Bassem Krimi, Mohamed Aziz Daghmouri, Paolo Pietro Bianchi, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Jim S Khan, Wahid Fattal, Christoph Reissfelder, Hani Oweira

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Mohamed Ali ChaouchDepartment of Visceral and Digestive Surgery, Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital, University of Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia. Docmedalichaouch@gmail.com.
Amine GouaderDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Perpignan Hospital, Perpignan, France.
Bassem KrimiDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Perpignan Hospital, Perpignan, France.
Mohamed Aziz DaghmouriDepartment of Anesthesiology, Montreuil Hospital Center, Montreuil, France.
Paolo Pietro BianchiDepartment of Surgery, Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Asst Santi Paolo e Carlo, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Guglielmo Niccolò PiozziDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Jim S KhanDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Wahid FattalDepartment of Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Christoph ReissfelderDepartment of Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Hani OweiraDepartment of Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRight colectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) is considered the standard for right-sided colon cancer. While laparoscopic CME (LCME) is widely performed, robotic CME (RCME) has emerged as an alternative approach. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the perioperative, pathological, and oncological outcomes of RCME and LCME.

methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, randomized and controlled clinical trials comparing RCME and LCME were analyzed. Primary outcomes included operative morbidity, blood loss, bleeding, conversion to open surgery, and operative time. Odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

resultsSeven studies comprising 733 patients (364 RCME and 369 LCME) were included. Postoperative morbidity did not differ significantly between RCME and LCME (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.66-1.37; p = 0.79). Blood loss was comparable between groups (MD - 4.6 mL, 95% CI - 27.7 to 18.5; p = 0.70). RCME showed a lower conversion rate to open surgery (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.52; p = 0.01), though this was based on a few events and low-certainty evidence. Operative time was longer with RCME (MD 45.6 min, 95% CI 27.5-63.8; p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences in postoperative ileus (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.40-1.92; p = 0.74), hospital stay (MD - 0.10 days, 95% CI - 0.61 to 0.40; p = 0.69), or lymph node yield (MD 2.05, 95% CI - 1.53-5.63; p = 0.26). Oncological outcomes were similar between RCME and LCME for disease-free survival (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.48-3.30; p = 0.65) and overall survival (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.20; p = 1.00). The certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate for most endpoints.

conclusionsRCME and LCME demonstrate comparable surgical, pathological, and oncological outcomes. RCME may be associated with a lower conversion rate, though this finding is uncertain due to the limited number of events and inter-study heterogeneity. Further high-quality randomized trials are warranted to confirm these observations and clarify cost-effectiveness.

Indexed as

ColectomyColonic NeoplasmsLaparoscopyMesocolonRobotic Surgical ProceduresBlood Loss, SurgicalHumansOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsColon cancerComplete mesocolon excisionLaparoscopic surgeryRobotic surgerySurgical outcomes

Identifiers

PMID41316150
PMCPMC12661720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.