ReviewAnnals of coloproctology2026
A systematic literature review of colorectal robotic surgery with the Hugo robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) system: feasibility, safety, and clinical applications.
Review in Annals of coloproctology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Hugo robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) system is a novel modular robotic platform that has recently been introduced in colorectal surgery. Although robotic approaches have improved surgical ergonomics and precision, evidence specific to the Hugo RAS system remains limited. This systematic review synthesizes the current literature on colorectal procedures performed with the Hugo RAS system and evaluates feasibility, safety, and early oncologic outcomes.
methodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Ovid was conducted through September 2025 in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Eligible studies included case series, cohort studies, and comparative analyses that reported perioperative or oncologic outcomes of colorectal procedures performed using the Hugo RAS system.
resultsThirteen studies were included and encompassed right and left hemicolectomies, rectal resections, and total colectomies. The median docking time was 7.5 minutes (range, 5-18 minutes), the median operative time was 225 minutes (range, 163-632 minutes), the conversion rate was 3.6%, and the mean hospital stay was 5.6 days. The overall complication rate was 11%, and most complications were Clavien-Dindo grade I-II. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes, including lymph node yield, total mesorectal excision quality, and circumferential resection margin status, were comparable to those reported for laparoscopy. Reported advantages included modular arm flexibility, an ergonomic open-console design, and stable visualization, whereas reported limitations included setup time and arm bulkiness.
conclusionThe available evidence supports the feasibility and safety of the Hugo RAS system in colorectal surgery, with outcomes broadly comparable to those of laparoscopy; however, the evidence remains limited by study heterogeneity, the absence of randomized trials, and reliance mainly on small retrospective series. The platform offers potentially useful ergonomic and technical features, but multicenter prospective studies with larger cohorts, long-term follow-up, and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to define its role in oncologic colorectal surgery. Trial registration: The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD420251028698).
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.