ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Single-center experience with robotic colorectal surgery for benign indications.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobotic colorectal surgery is established for malignant indications, but evidence supporting its use in benign disease remains limited. We describe perioperative outcomes of 403 consecutive robotic colorectal resections across all indications at a single UK NHS center, with primary focus on safety across benign indications.
methodsRetrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database (February 2020-November 2025). Cases were stratified by indication: malignant or highly suspected malignancy (n = 332, 82.4%) and benign (n = 71, 17.6%). Benign cases were subclassified into diverticular disease (n = 39), ulcerative colitis (n = 14), Crohn's disease (n = 13), and other (n = 5). Primary outcomes were operative time, length of stay, and Clavien-Dindo complication grade.
resultsBenign patients were younger (median 53 vs. 68 years; p < 0.001) with higher rates of prior abdominal surgery (33.8% vs 19.6%; p = 0.012). Across all 403 cases, median operative time was 240 min (IQR 199-302), median LOS 5 days (IQR 4-8), and CD Grade III-IV rate 9.2%. Despite equivalent operative times (p = 0.84), benign cases converted more frequently (15.5% vs 6.9%; p = 0.031), independently predicted by age (OR 1.04; p = 0.013), and cancer indication (OR 0.31; p = 0.012). Within the benign cohort, IBD patients were younger than those with diverticular disease (p < 0.001). Procedure type and stoma rates differed significantly by subgroup (both p < 0.001), yet complication rates, operative time, and LOS were equivalent.
conclusionRobotic colorectal surgery is safe and reproducible across malignant and benign indications within specialised colorectal robotic centers. Complication profiles matched published benchmarks. Benign cases had a higher conversion rate, but this was driven by prior surgical burden and operative complexity, not platform limitation, and it did not increase morbidity. These data constitute the largest single-center UK evidence base for robotic colorectal surgery across all indications and support the expansion of robotic commissioning into benign practice.
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.