Evidence Hub

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Colon Cancer: Efficacy, Safety, and Outcomes—A Focus on Studies from 2020–2024

Roxana Loriana Negruț, Adrian Coțe, Vasile-Aurel Caus, A. M. Maghiar

Cancers, 2024

50,771 participants · 36 citations

Abstract

Simple Summary In this research, we explored the latest advancements in minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer, by comparing laparoscopic surgery to the robotic approach. Our goal was to determine which method has better outcomes in terms of length of surgery, hospital stay, the likelihood of conversion, rate of complications, anastomotic leaks, and the effectiveness of tumor removal by evaluating the number of lymphatic nodes harvested. The findings could help surgeons and patients make more informed decisions related to the surgical options, considering the benefits of each technique. This summary aims to give a straightforward overview of the importance of this research and how it could impact the surgical approach. Abstract Background: Minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of colon cancer has significantly advanced over the years. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the operative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colon cancer, focusing on operative time, hospital stay, conversion rates, anastomotic leak rates, and total number lymph node harvested. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search across four databases up to January 2024, registering our protocol with PROSPERO (CRD42024513326). We included studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for colon cancer, assessing operative time, hospital length of stay, and other perioperative outcomes. Risk of bias was evaluated…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 50,771 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free