ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Early implementation and feasibility of Hugo RAS system-assisted right colectomy for right-sided colon cancer: an exploratory propensity score-matched comparison with the da Vinci surgical system.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical evidence for robot-assisted right colectomy (RARC) using the Hugo RAS system remains limited. We aimed to describe the early implementation experience of Hugo-assisted RARC and to preliminarily compare short-term outcomes with those of the da Vinci system.
methodsThis dual-center retrospective cohort study included 74 patients who underwent RARC with complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer between September 2019 and April 2025. Patients who underwent multivisceral resections for non-colorectal disease or had multiple colorectal cancers were excluded. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied at a 1:1 ratio, and the perioperative, postoperative, and pathological outcomes of 22 patients in each group treated using Hugo or da Vinci system were compared.
resultsThe baseline characteristics were more balanced after matching, although a slight imbalance remained. The console time (146 vs. 132 min; P = 0.549) and estimated blood loss (5 vs. 0 mL; P = 0.299) were comparable, but the total surgical duration was significantly longer for the Hugo group (286 vs. 246 min; P = 0.015). The pathological outcomes, including resection margins and harvested lymph nodes, were similar between groups. No conversion to open surgery, anastomotic leakage, reoperation, 30-day readmission, or mortality occurred in either group. One Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa complication unrelated to the surgery occurred in the da Vinci group. The postoperative hospital stay was comparable between the groups.
conclusionsThe early implementation of RARC using Hugo appeared feasible and yielded acceptable short-term perioperative and pathological outcomes in a limited matched cohort. Although the total surgical duration was longer with the Hugo RAS system than with the da Vinci system, other short-term outcomes were broadly similar between the groups and should be interpreted as preliminary. Further multicenter prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and evaluate long-term oncological outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42754633What 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.