Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<b>Background</b>: Right hemicolectomy remains the standard surgical treatment for right colon diseases. This study evaluates robotic versus laparoscopic approaches to determine optimal, minimally invasive strategies, balancing technical efficacy with healthcare economics. <b>Materials and Methods</b>: This retrospective study evaluates robotic versus laparoscopic approaches using data from 46 studies (2003-2025) involving 36,868 patients (6,312 robotic, 30,547 laparoscopic). Primary outcomes assessed were lymph node yield, operative time, and hospital stay; secondary outcomes included blood loss, conversion rates, infections, readmissions, and costs. <b>Results</b>: Concerning robotic surgery, lymph node harvest was higher (MD 1.34 for CME; MD 1.27 for non-CME). Laparoscopy showed shorter operative times (MD 25.73 for CME; MD 42.45 for non-CME). Hospital stays showed no significant difference. Robotics demonstrated lower blood loss in non-CME cases (MD -0.38). Conversion rates favored robotics (1% vs. 10% for CME; 4% vs. 8% for non-CME). No significant differences were found in wound infections or non-CME readmissions, though robotics showed lower CME readmission costs (MD 5.34). There were several study-acknowledged limitations, including surgeon preference bias, protocol variability, learning curves, and evolving techniques over the 22-year period. Cost analyses considered both direct surgical expenses and postoperative care. <b>Conclusions</b>: While robotics offers advantages in oncological resection and procedural stability, laparoscopy maintains efficiency benefits. These findings contribute to ongoing discussions about optimal, minimally invasive approaches for right colon pathologies, balancing technical efficacy with healthcare economics. By comparing surgical techniques, surgeon expertise, patient characteristics, and healthcare costs across multiple institutions, this study seeks to provide meaningful insights for surgical decision-making and further standardization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-02-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15041493
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Marco Coccetta, Valentina Bartolini, Sara Lauricella, Francesco Brucchi et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

Evaluation of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Right Colon Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Marco Coccetta, Valentina Bartolini, Sara Lauricella, Francesco Brucchi, Daniele Giuliani, Roberto Cirocchi, Francesca Pennetti Pennella, Alessandro Spizzirri, Martina Sardonini, Vincenzo Napolitano, Luca Properzi
article en

Abstract

<b>Background</b>: Right hemicolectomy remains the standard surgical treatment for right colon diseases. This study evaluates robotic versus laparoscopic approaches to determine optimal, minimally invasive strategies, balancing technical efficacy with healthcare economics. <b>Materials and Methods</b>: This retrospective study evaluates robotic versus laparoscopic approaches using data from 46 studies (2003-2025) involving 36,868 patients (6,312 robotic, 30,547 laparoscopic). Primary outcomes assessed were lymph node yield, operative time, and hospital stay; secondary outcomes included blood loss, conversion rates, infections, readmissions, and costs. <b>Results</b>: Concerning robotic surgery, lymph node harvest was higher (MD 1.34 for CME; MD 1.27 for non-CME). Laparoscopy showed shorter operative times (MD 25.73 for CME; MD 42.45 for non-CME). Hospital stays showed no significant difference. Robotics demonstrated lower blood loss in non-CME cases (MD -0.38). Conversion rates favored robotics (1% vs. 10% for CME; 4% vs. 8% for non-CME). No significant differences were found in wound infections or non-CME readmissions, though robotics showed lower CME readmission costs (MD 5.34). There were several study-acknowledged limitations, including surgeon preference bias, protocol variability, learning curves, and evolving techniques over the 22-year period. Cost analyses considered both direct surgical expenses and postoperative care. <b>Conclusions</b>: While robotics offers advantages in oncological resection and procedural stability, laparoscopy maintains efficiency benefits. These findings contribute to ongoing discussions about optimal, minimally invasive approaches for right colon pathologies, balancing technical efficacy with healthcare economics. By comparing surgical techniques, surgeon expertise, patient characteristics, and healthcare costs across multiple institutions, this study seeks to provide meaningful insights for surgical decision-making and further standardization.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(4)
University of Milan (IT), University of Perugia (IT), Azienda Ospedaliera S.Maria (IT)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.