ArticleBMC surgery2026
Robotic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (PRORHEM): protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in BMC surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06067620 (Robotic Right Hemicolectomy With Intracorporeal Anastomosis Versus Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy With Extracorporeal Anastomosis), which is not on this 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.
Robotic Right Hemicolectomy With Intracorporeal Anastomosis Versus Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy With Extracorporeal Anastomosis (PRORHEM): a Randomized Controlled Trial
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (lapRHC) for colorectal cancer, intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) has been associated with faster recovery and lower incidence of incisional hernia (IH) compared with extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA). However, due to technical constraints, ICA is not widely adopted, and ECA remains the standard approach. Robotic surgery, with enhanced dexterity and suturing capability, facilitates ICA and may therefore improve short-term outcomes and reduce IH incidence.
methodsWe designed a monocentric, double-blind randomized controlled trial to compare robotic right hemicolectomy (robRHC) with D2 lymphadenectomy, ICA, and off-midline extraction (fully minimally invasive) versus lapRHC with D2 lymphadenectomy, ECA, and midline extraction (standard of care). The primary endpoint is bowel recovery, assessed by time to first passage of stool. Secondary endpoints include perioperative safety (morbidity, mortality, resection margins, lymph node yield), length of stay, IH incidence, and patient-reported esthetic and quality-of-life outcomes. Based on a hypothesized 1-day reduction in bowel recovery, a total of 70 patients will be randomized. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial complies with the Declaration of Helsinki, ICH-GCP, and Swiss regulatory standards. It has been approved by the local ethics committee (CCER 2024 - 00975) and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06067620, 09.05.2024).
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.