ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Patient-reported outcomes in low anterior resection syndrome: a comparison of open and robotic surgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite recent advances in multimodal treatment strategies, radical tumor resection remains a cornerstone in the management of patients with rectal cancer. However, a substantial proportion of patients develop postoperative functional impairment known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Emerging evidence suggests that robotic-assisted surgery may offer superior functional outcomes compared to other approaches. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the incidence and severity of LARS after robotic and open surgery using a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM).
methodsThis retrospective, single-center cohort study included patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon or rectum who underwent open or robotic oncological resection between 2014 and 2024. Eligible participants completed a standardized, validated questionnaire to assess their individual LARS score. The LARS scores were subsequently correlated with selected clinicopathological characteristics.
resultsLARS questionnaires were analyzed in 184 patients. The incidence of major LARS was comparable between open and robotic surgery (39.1% vs. 39.2%), as was the rate of minor LARS (20% vs. 15%), with no statistically significant difference observed in multivariable ordinal regression (p = 0.451). Independent risk factors for LARS included neoadjuvant treatment, hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis, formation of a protective stoma, tumor location in the middle and lower rectum, and total mesorectal excision.
conclusionLARS remains a significant clinical challenge, irrespective of the surgical approach. This PROM-based finding is particularly relevant for preoperative counseling and shared decision-making, as it suggests that open surgery is not inherently associated with worse functional outcomes in terms of LARS. Future research should aim to identify the biological, anatomical, and clinical determinants underlying the variable susceptibility to LARS.
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.