Comparison of Functional Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Robotic and laparoscopic approaches are widely used for rectal cancer surgery. Although robotic systems provide enhanced visualization and dexterity, it remains unclear whether these advantages improve postoperative urinary and sexual function. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (2000-2025) were searched for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Outcomes included postoperative ileus, urinary retention, and urinary and sexual function. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. Study quality was assessed with MINORS, and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: Forty-four observational studies (6,121 patients) were included. Robotic surgery was associated with lower urinary retention, though this may reflect publication bias. No significant difference was found in postoperative ileus. Subgroup analyses at 3, 6, and 12 months showed no significant differences in urinary or sexual function. Although pooled results slightly favored robotic surgery, these effects were inconsistent, not sustained, and clinically modest. CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery may reduce urinary retention but shows no consistent functional superiority over laparoscopy. Outcomes at key follow-up points are comparable. As all studies were observational, evidence certainty is low, and findings should be interpreted cautiously.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Investigative Surgery
Published
2026-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2026.2652787
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

Comparison of Functional Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yu Du, Wenjing Wang, Yiwei Wang, Hui Li
Journal of Investigative Surgery
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

Comparison of Functional Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yu Du, Wenjing Wang, Yiwei Wang, Hui Li
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotic and laparoscopic approaches are widely used for rectal cancer surgery. Although robotic systems provide enhanced visualization and dexterity, it remains unclear whether these advantages improve postoperative urinary and sexual function. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (2000-2025) were searched for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Outcomes included postoperative ileus, urinary retention, and urinary and sexual function. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. Study quality was assessed with MINORS, and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: Forty-four observational studies (6,121 patients) were included. Robotic surgery was associated with lower urinary retention, though this may reflect publication bias. No significant difference was found in postoperative ileus. Subgroup analyses at 3, 6, and 12 months showed no significant differences in urinary or sexual function. Although pooled results slightly favored robotic surgery, these effects were inconsistent, not sustained, and clinically modest. CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery may reduce urinary retention but shows no consistent functional superiority over laparoscopy. Outcomes at key follow-up points are comparable. As all studies were observational, evidence certainty is low, and findings should be interpreted cautiously.

Journal of Investigative SurgeryVol. 39(1)
Changchun University of Chinese Medicine (CN), The Affiliated Hospital to Changchun University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
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.