ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2026
Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in the Era of Robotics: Evolution, Eclipse, or Equilibrium?
Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Environmental impact of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in the Era of Robotics: Evolution, Eclipse, or Equilibrium?Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive colorectal surgery has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past three decades. Laparoscopy, once viewed with skepticism, is now firmly established as a standard approach, supported by robust randomized trials demonstrating oncologic safety and improved recovery compared to open surgery. More recently, robotic platforms have emerged, promising enhanced dexterity, three-dimensional visualization, and ergonomic benefits. Their adoption has been rapid, with projections suggesting robotic resections may soon surpass laparoscopic procedures in some regions. Despite this momentum, evidence indicates that robotic surgery offers equivalence rather than superiority in most domains. Oncologic outcomes, postoperative recovery, and quality-of-life measures remain comparable between the two modalities. Robotics may provide advantages in technically demanding settings such as a narrow pelvis, obese patients, or after pelvic radiation, and some studies suggest improved urinary and sexual function. However, these benefits come at the cost of longer operative times and significantly higher expenses, raising concerns about accessibility and value, especially in resource-constrained healthcare systems. Laparoscopy continues to offer broad global availability, faster setup, and cost-effectiveness, while serving as the bedrock skill set for robotic mastery. The future of colorectal surgery will likely be defined not by one technology replacing another, but by their integration-augmented further by emerging innovations such as artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and next-generation robotic systems. The challenge for surgeons and institutions is to apply these tools thoughtfully, ensuring that innovation is balanced with equity, sustainability, and clinical relevance.
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.