SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Appraisal of the robotic approach to beyond-TME via video-based materials; a systematic review and evaluation utilising the IDEAL framework.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic beyond-TME resection is a novel surgical technique for management of locally advanced rectal cancer encroaching beyond the mesorectal fascial envelope. Many case reports describing the technique are published in video format. This format is traditionally excluded from systematic review.
methodsA systematic review was undertaken to retrieve and evaluate video publications describing robotic bTME. The study was pre-registered in the PROSPERO database. The Ovid, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched for pertinent publications. The IDEAL2A and Ro-VEGaS (adapted from LAP-VEGaS) checklists were applied.
resultsA total of thirteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion and analysed. The overall quality of the included videos was good. Substantial variability between videos was observed with respect to anatomical labelling and description of operative steps. Adherence to the IDEAL framework was poor.
conclusionsStandardisation of video publications describing robotic bTME is required to optimise educational value and render them amenable to systematic critical appraisal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41236622What 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.