TPT 1.06 Robotic versus Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: A Propensity-Matched Analysis from a UK Colorectal Unit

Clicks: 23
ID: 323916
2026
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
Steady

Ranked #219 of 432 articles by views in the british journal of surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 432 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
Abstract Background Right hemicolectomy (RHC) is one of the most common colorectal-cancer-operations performed in the NHS. Although robotic platforms are becoming more available, it's unclear whether they offer any practical advantage over standard laparoscopy for this operation. We evaluated real-world outcomes from our unit to inform everyday-operative-decision-making. Methods All elective oncological RHCs performed between Sept-2023–Feb-2025 were reviewed from theatre records. Only cancer cases were included; benign or non-resectional procedures were excluded. To allow a fair comparison, we performed propensity-score matching (1:1) using routinely available variables: age, BMI, ASA grade, comorbidity score (CCI), and gender. This produced 21 well-matched robotic–laparoscopic pairs. Continuous outcomes (operating time, theatre time, LOS) were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and complications/readmissions using exact McNemar testing. Results Before-matching, there were 69 robotic and 36 laparoscopic RHCs. After matching, no meaningful differences were detected in any key peri-operative outcomes. Median operating time was 148 min (robotic)vs141 min (laparoscopic) (p=0.41). Median theatre time was 186vs173 min (p=0.45). Length of stay was similar: 4.0 vs 4.5 days(p=0.63). Complication rates were 19% (robotic) vs 33% (lap) (p=0.55), and readmission-rates were 14% vs 10% (p=1.00). Conclusions For RHC in our unit, robotics did not demonstrate a measurable advantage over laparoscopy in operative time, LOS, or early-postoperative-outcomes. Laparoscopy remains an excellent first-line approach for most RHCs within the NHS, with robotics used selectively at the surgeon’s-discretion. Larger datasets are needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness and specific subgroups that may benefit.
Reference Key
openalex_W7172485919 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mohammed Arifuzaman, Madan Jha, Vikram Garud
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal the british journal of surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/bjs/znag087.162
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag087.162
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.