ArticleThe Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences2026
Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Colectomy: Findings on Short-Term Outcomes From A Multi-Institutional Propensity Score-Matched Study.
Article in The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study compared the short-term outcomes and perioperative complications of robotic-assisted colectomy (RAC) and laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) in patients with colon cancer. This retrospective study included patients with histologically confirmed colon adenocarcinoma who underwent either RAC or LAC at five medical centers in Taiwan over the period between January 2015 and December 2021. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and complications were obtained from operative notes and medical records. A total of 838 patients were included, with 413 undergoing RAC and 425 undergoing LAC. In the original study cohort, right colectomies and sigmoid colectomies were more frequent in the RAC group. In the matched study cohort, the median operative time was significantly longer in the RAC group (p = 0.0065), particularly in the subgroup undergoing left and sigmoid colectomies (p < 0.0001). Conversion rates were similar between the groups (p = 0.0616). Postoperative length of stay was significantly shorter in the RAC group by 1 day (p = 0.0299). Although overall postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and local recurrence rates were comparable between the groups (all p > 0.05), the patients undergoing right hemicolectomy had a significantly lower complication rate in the RAC group (p = 0.0018). This study is the first multi-institutional propensity score-matched investigation in Taiwan comparing short-term outcomes between RAC and LAC. Our findings suggest that RAC is a safe and feasible alternative to LAC, offering comparable oncological safety with potential advantages such as a reduced length of hospital stay.
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.