ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Should we transition to robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS)? A retrospective comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic TAMIS.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a widely used technique for treating rectal neoplasms, traditionally performed using a well-established laparoscopic platform. Recently, robotic TAMIS (R-TAMIS) has gained popularity due to potential advantages in ergonomics, visualization, and instrument dexterity. This study was designed to review the experience of a colorectal surgery group with both robotic and laparoscopic TAMIS (L-TAMIS) and to compare their short-term surgical outcomes. A retrospective chart review was conducted of the last 53 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic TAMIS for rectal neoplasms by four colorectal surgeons from October 2014 to September 2025. We collected data on patient demographics, surgical variables, pathological outcomes, and 30-day complications. Demographic variables were similar between groups. A significantly larger median lesion size was observed in the R-TAMIS group (3.63 cm vs. 2.49 cm; p = 0.001). The average lesion distance from the anal verge was comparable, 8.08 cm (3–13 cm) for R-TAMIS and 7.52 cm (3–15 cm) for L-TAMIS. The mean operative time was 78 (±26.81) minutes for R-TAMIS and 71 (±25.49) minutes for L-TAMIS. No conversions or 30-day mortalities occurred in either group. After the introduction of R-TAMIS in 2022, operative times remained largely stable over time, with only a slight downward trend and no clear learning-curve effect. There was an approximately USD 757 increase in cost for R-TAMIS compared with L-TAMIS. R-TAMIS was associated with resection of larger lesions and demonstrated safety and feasibility, with low morbidity and no mortality. Once the robotic platform was adopted by our surgeons for TAMIS, the procedure was no longer performed laparoscopically. The prone jackknife position has been adequate for lesions in all locations when using the robotic platform. The retrospective design and small sample size were among the study’s limitations, and outcomes were only analyzed at 30 days. Future studies might better elucidate differences and determine surgeons’ preferences regarding both platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41724896What 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.