ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2026
Interim analysis of short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: results from the ESSIMIC trial.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02871960 (Evaluation of Surgical Stress and Immune Response After Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Evaluation of Surgical Stress and Immune Response After Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery (ESSIMIC)
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond the era of monopoly to diversity: new horizons in robotic colorectal cancer surgery.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine whether the benefits of robotic surgery can be applied to the treatment of colon cancer by evaluating short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic colonic resection.
methodsThis interim analysis of an interventional multicenter randomized trial was conducted to compare outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed between January 2017 and December 2019. The study specifically assessed short-term outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic right or left colectomy for cancer. In addition, all short-term outcomes were evaluated in separate subgroups of right and left colonic resections through prespecified subgroup analyses.
resultsA total of 323 patients were analyzed, of whom 142 underwent robotic-assisted surgery and 181 underwent laparoscopic surgery. Overall, 109 complications (33.7%) occurred in the short-term period, 41 (28.9%) in the robotic group and 68 (37.6%) in the laparoscopic group, with no differences between groups in intraoperative or postoperative complications. However, grade III complications were significantly more frequent in the laparoscopic group, with 17 cases (9.4%) compared to 5 cases (3.5%) in the robotic group. Oncological radicality was similar between groups. Functional recovery after surgery was superior in the robotic group, as reflected by a shorter time to mobilization (17.5±10.2 hours vs. 21.1±11.5 hours). In the right colectomy subgroup, rates of grade III complications (1.9% vs. 11.7%) and lymph nodes retrieved (20.3±10.3 vs. 20.2±6.4) favored robotic surgery. In the left colon cancer subgroup, functional recovery was also improved with robotic surgery (44.3±22.2 hours vs. 61.1±31.1 hours, as measured by the composite recovery outcome).
conclusionRobotic surgery is associated with fewer severe complications and improved postoperative recovery following colonic resections. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02871960.
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.