ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Oncologic and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Clinically Uterine-Confined High-Grade Adenocarcinoma.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term survival outcomes of robotic-assisted versus traditional laparoscopy for the treatment of stage I endometrial cancer: a National Cancer Database analysis.Gynecologic oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility and Outcomes of a Robotic Retroperitoneal Approach to Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy in Intermediate- and High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: A Prospective Study.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Article
- Cancer of the corpus uteri: A 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Article
- Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopy for Endometrial Cancer Staging: A Comparative Two-Center Study.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RA) and conventional laparoscopy (LSC) in apparent clinically uterine-confined, high-grade adenocarcinoma.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted to identify patients with newly diagnosed high-grade uterine adenocarcinoma treated at our institution between 1 January 2009 and 30 June 2021. Exclusion criteria included bulky extrauterine disease, no lymph node assessment, or synchronous tumors. Clinicopathologic details were obtained from medical records. Postoperative complications were classified using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Surgical Secondary Events system, and statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests.
resultsOf 901 patients identified, 748 (83%) underwent RA and 153 (17%) underwent LSC. Median age was 65 years (range 25-92) and median body mass index was 30 kg/m
conclusionsRA demonstrated comparable oncologic outcomes to LSC in patients with high-grade endometrial carcinoma, with no significant difference in postoperative complications or long-term survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.