Robotic evolution from Si to Xi in rectal cancer assessing operative performance and oncological outcomes

Clicks: 2
ID: 310262
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #360 of 490 articles by views in Frontiers in surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 490 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Purpose: To compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes between robotic surgical platforms (Si vs. Xi) in rectal carcinoma. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 86 robotic rectal cancer resections (Si: n = 31; Xi: n = 55) were analyzed at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Hospital between November 2019 and June 2024. Results: Among 86 patients with comparable baseline clinicopathological variables (all p > 0.05), the Xi system showed superior perioperative efficiency: shorter operation (226.7 vs 282.1 min, p = 0.010), console (p = 0.016) and docking times (p = 0.013), less blood loss (83.8 vs 155.8 mL, p = 0.005), and a shorter postoperative stay (7.8 vs 9.7 days, p = 0.016). On multivariable analyses, Xi remained independently associated with a shorter operative time (p = 0.002), reduced blood loss (p = 0.027), and decreased length of stay (p = 0.038). Complication rates, lymph node yield, and short-term oncologic quality indicators (distal resection margin [DRM], circumferential resection margin [CRM], mesorectal integrity) were comparable between two systems (all p > 0.05). In low rectal cancers (≤ 5 cm from the anal verge) with balanced baselines, Xi achieved a higher sphincter preservation rate (90.5% vs 55.6%, p = 0.049). Survival trends numerically favored Xi (3-year DFS 79.8% vs 73.0%; OS 92.0% vs 83.0%), but differences were not significant (DFS: p = 0.54; OS: p = 0.26). On Cox regression, TNM stage independently predicted both DFS (p = 0.041) and OS (p = 0.029). However, the robotic platform (Xi vs Si) showed no survival advantage (DFS: HR = 1.33, 95% CI 0.53–3.37, p = 0.548; OS: HR = 1.43, 95% CI 0.76–2.67, p = 0.267). Conclusions: Compared with Si, the Xi platform confers measurable perioperative advantages— shorter operative time, less blood loss, and reduced hospitalization—without compromising short-term oncologic quality or survival. In low rectal tumors, Xi may facilitate sphincter preservation under comparable baselines. Long-term outcomes appear driven primarily by disease stage rather than platform generation.
Reference Key
imported_1768925779_696faa535ca83 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors WANG, JIEFU
Journal Frontiers in surgery
Year Year not found
DOI
10.3389/fsurg.2025.1668213
URL
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/surgery/articles/10.3389/fsurg.2025.1668213/full
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.