Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41817778›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026

Robotic vs. laparoscopic redo ileocolonic resection for recurrent Crohn's disease.

Ruiqing Liu, Luca Stocchi, Richard Sassun, Kevin T Behm, David W Larson, Anne-Lise D D'Angelo, Kellie L Mathis, Dorin T Colibaseanu, Michelle F DeLeon, Amit Merchea and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ruiqing LiuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, No. 16, Jiangsu Road, Shinan District, Qingdao, 266003, China.
Luca StocchiDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic Florida, 4500 San Pablo Rd, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA. Stocchi.Luca@mayo.edu.
Richard SassunDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, National Tumor Institute, Milan, Italy.
Kevin T BehmDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
David W LarsonDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Anne-Lise D D'AngeloDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Kellie L MathisDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Dorin T ColibaseanuDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic Florida, 4500 San Pablo Rd, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Michelle F DeLeonDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic Florida, 4500 San Pablo Rd, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Amit MercheaDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic Florida, 4500 San Pablo Rd, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
Sherief F ShawkiDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic surgery is increasingly utilized for primary ileocolic Crohn’s disease (CD), but its role in recurrent CD is less established. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of robotic redo ileocolic resection (ICR). We retrospectively reviewed adult patients with recurrent CD who underwent either robotic (RR-ICR) or laparoscopic redo (LR-ICR) ICR at our institution between January 2020 and November 2024. Perioperative variables, conversion rate, short- and long-term postoperative outcomes were compared. Sixty-six patients were included: 24 (36.4%) underwent RR-ICR and 42 (63.6%) LR-ICR. RR-ICR was associated with a significantly lower conversion rate (4.2% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.046) and higher rate of intracorporeal anastomosis (70.8% vs. 7.1%, p < 0.001). Short-term outcomes, including morbidity (33.3% vs. 31%, p = 1), length of postoperative stay (3.6 ± 1.8 vs. 3.6 ± 2.2, days, p = 0.69), and 30-day readmission (both 16.7%, p = 1), were similar between groups. The cumulative endoscopic recurrence (ER)-free rates at 12 and 24 months were 72.1% and 51.4% in the RR-ICR group and 74.7% and 37.3% in the LR-ICR group, respectively, with no significant differences in time-to-event analysis for ER (p = 0.91) or clinical recurrence rates (p = 0.35) between the groups. On multivariable analysis, only male gender was independently associated with increased risk of ER (Hazard ratio (HR): 2.54, p = 0.028). Robotic redo ileocolic resection is a safe and feasible alternative which could offer some advantage when compared with laparoscopic surgery in patients with recurrent CD.

Indexed as

ColectomyColonCrohn DiseaseIleumLaparoscopyReoperationRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAnastomosis, SurgicalFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceCrohn's diseaseLaparoscopic surgeryRecurrenceRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID41817778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.