Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42151665›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2026

Robotic vs. laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in high BMI patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chengzheng Wang, Huaicheng Zhou

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Chengzheng WangDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Hospital of Jianhu, Yancheng, 224700, China.
Huaicheng ZhouDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Hospital of Jianhu, Yancheng, 224700, China. 15051329538m@sina.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-4165-0071

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the perioperative outcomes, postoperative complications, and oncologic results between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgeries in patients with high BMI.

methodsA meta-analysis was conducted under the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to May 2025 for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgeries among patients with BMI ≥ 28 kg/m

resultsThe pooled analysis of five studies showed that the robotic group had a significantly shorter hospital stay and a lower conversion rate than the laparoscopic group (P < 0.05), while operative time was approximately 30 min shorter in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). Following exclusion of Zhao 2024, subanalysis of the remaining four studies demonstrated that the laparoscopic group still had a significantly shorter operative time and the robotic group maintained a significantly lower conversion rate; however, a significant difference in hospital stay was no longer present, and no significant differences were found for harvested lymph nodes or postoperative complications. No major difference was observed concerning lymph node yield and readmission rates between the surgical measures.

conclusionRobotic surgery was associated with a significantly lower conversion rate, whereas laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly shorter operative times; no consistent advantage was observed for hospital stay, as this finding was not replicated in sensitivity analysis. Further high-quality studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Indexed as

Body Mass IndexLaparoscopyRectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsLaparoscopic surgeryMeta-analysisObesityRectal cancerRobotic surgerySystematic review

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.