ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Comparison of outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in patients with heart failure: a national readmission database analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis retrospective cohort study, based on a national administrative database, compared postoperative outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery in patients with heart failure (HF).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Adult patients with CRC and pre-existing HF who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic-assisted surgery were included. Patients with metastatic disease or those who underwent open surgery were excluded. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and major postoperative complications, including acute kidney injury (AKI), venous thromboembolism (VTE), cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and respiratory failure. Secondary outcomes included prolonged length of hospital stay (LOS) and 30- and 90-day readmission rates. Multivariable logistic regression accounting for the NRD's complex sampling design was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsData from a total of 1,380 patients were analyzed. Patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery had a significantly higher incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) compared with those who underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (23.0 vs. 17.0%, p = 0.018). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, robotic-assisted surgery remained independently associated with an increased risk of AKI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.52; 95% CI 1.10-2.09; p = 0.010). Robotic-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly higher risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) compared to laparoscopic surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.52; 95% CI 1.10-2.09; p = 0.010).
conclusionsIn patients with HF undergoing minimally invasive CRC surgery, robotic-assisted surgery was associated with a higher risk of AKI but a similar length of hospital stay (LOS) and readmission rates compared to laparoscopic surgery. These findings underscore the need for careful perioperative management and individualized surgical planning in this high-risk population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42536088What 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.