Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

48Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/Aim: A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE for relevant papers published between 2010 and December 2017 by using specific search terms. We analyzed outcomes over short- and long-term periods. Results: We identified 23 papers reporting results that compared RAS for rectal cancer with LAS. Our meta-analysis included 4,348 patients with rectal cancer; 2,068 had undergone RAS, and 2,280 had undergone LAS. In the short- and long-term period, 27 and 7 outcome variables were examined, respectively. RAS for rectal cancer was significantly associated with a greater operative time and a lower conversion rate to open surgery in the short-term, and results in almost similar outcomes in the long-term, compared to LAS. Conclusion: RAS may be an acceptable surgical treatment option compared to LAS for rectal cancer.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ohtani, H., Maeda, K., Nomura, S., Shinto, O., Mizuyama, Y., Nakagawa, H., … Ohira, M. (2018). Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. In Vivo, 32(3), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.11283

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free