ArticleCureus2025
Early Experience With Robotic Approaches to Inflammatory Bowel Disease Surgery: A Single-Center Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
Background Understanding the surgical outcomes following surgery for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is crucial for proper consent and informed decision-making. Contemporary recommendations to guide IBD surgical intervention now favor a minimally invasive approach, if possible. We present surgical outcomes following the introduction of robotic minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for IBD in a tertiary center. Aim Robotic approaches to colorectal resections are now becoming routine for colorectal cancer surgery but use in IBD is still not currently mainstream. Here, we describe our initial experience with robotic IBD surgery and compare 30-day surgical outcomes to laparoscopic and open approaches. Methods A single tertiary referral center experience of all patients over 16 years of age undergoing surgery for IBD between 2020 and 2023 was analyzed. This retrospective review of all prospectively gathered surgical data utilized the hospital database and prospectively recorded ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) records detailing patient recovery and complications. For the statistical calculations, we used ANOVA for overall data and Tukey's HSD for comparing each cohort. Results A total of 140 cases were analyzed, showing mean procedure time in minutes across robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches (p=0.997): colectomies (268, 282, 265), panproctocolectomies (380, 425, 382), proctectomies (315, 259, 228), and small bowel resections (161, 165, 202). There was zero mortality across all groups. For robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches, the major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification 3+) rates were 5.4%, 8%, and 3.5% (p=0.686), respectively, and the readmission rates were 8.10%, 9.33%, and 21.42%, respectively. The mean post-operative stays in days (p=0.164) were as follows: colectomies (6.70, 8.45, 10.33), panproctocolectomy (8.40, 8.92, 10.29), completion proctectomy (6.00, 5.00, 8.20), and ileocecal/small bowel resection (6.42, 6.46, 6.80). The costs for patients undergoing robotic surgery were higher (p=0.11). Conclusion This early data demonstrate real-world experience of the introduction of robotic surgical techniques for colorectal resection. Robotic surgical outcomes demonstrate equivalence with the laparoscopic outcomes and are improved compared to open procedures in most metrics but are more expensive.
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.