ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal cancer surgery in the NHS: real-world evidence from sequential adoption of Versius and da Vinci Xi.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a propensity-matched comparison of the inflammatory response and MASLD trajectories.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Early outcomes after adopting robotic intracorporeal anastomosis for right hemicolectomy - a propensity-weighted analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple robotic systems are now available for colorectal cancer surgery, yet comparative real-world evidence to guide NHS adoption remains limited. This study compared perioperative, oncological, and learning-curve outcomes for laparoscopic, Versius (CMR), and da Vinci Xi (dV) resections. A single-centre evaluation included elective colorectal cancer resections between November 2021 and May 2025 using laparoscopy, CMR or dV. Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and operative time; secondary outcomes included lymph-node yield and Clavien–Dindo ≥ 2 complications. Analyses used non-parametric tests, Bonferroni-adjusted comparisons and multivariable regression. Learning curves were assessed with rolling means, LOWESS and CUSUM. A total of 290 patients were included: laparoscopy (n = 85), CMR (n = 103), and dV (n = 102). Median LOS was 5, 5 and 4 days respectively (p < 0.001) with dV significantly shorter than laparoscopy after adjustment (− 2.33 days; 95% CI − 3.78 to − 0.88). Risk-adjusted analysis of prolonged LOS (> 5 days) showed lower odds with dV versus CMR (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23–0.85; p = 0.002), with adjusted probabilities of 22.1% for dV, 37.5% for CMR and 49.0% for laparoscopy. CMR had longer adjusted operative times than laparoscopy (+ 37.2 min; p = 0.001). Lymph-node yield was highest with dV (median 25.5 vs. 22; p = 0.007), confirmed in adjusted analysis (+ 4.0 nodes; p = 0.004). Major complications were similar; CMR rectal cases had higher unadjusted rates. Learning curves showed operative time reduction for both robotic systems, with earlier plateauing for dV. Both robotic platforms were safe and oncologically equivalent; however, dV demonstrated shorter LOS, higher lymph node yield, and a more favourable learning curve.
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.