ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Comparison of robotic and manual scope holders in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the performance of a robotic (da Vinci Xi-based) scope holder with manual holding during laparoscopic colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery.
methodsA total of 170 CRC cases were retrospectively assigned to two equal groups: an investigation group (da Vinci Xi-assisted procedures) and a reference group (human camera assistant). Surgical and recovery outcomes were analyzed, including pain intensity, stress levels, and gastrointestinal and humoral immune functions. Additionally, the safety of the procedures and surgeons' subjective experiences were evaluated.
resultsThe investigation group showed significant improvements, including reduced blood loss, shorter surgical duration, earlier drain removal and discharge, lower costs, and less post-operative pain (24, 48, and 72 hours post-surgery). This group also exhibited lower stress levels, fewer complications, and better recovery in terms of gastrointestinal and humoral immunity (all P<0.05). Surgeons in the investigation group reported higher scores for procedural vigor, operational efficiency, and comfort (P<0.05).
conclusionThe robotic system offers clinical advantages in laparoscopic CRC procedures.
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.