[Visualizing the evidence of robotic gastrointestinal surgery based on guideline recommendations: an evidence mapping study of gastric and colorectal cancer].

Q3 Medicine
Q Wang, M M Niu, R S Li, S Q Wang, Galyna Shabat, Alberto Aiolfi, J H Tian, K W Jiang, X N Liu, Luigi Bonavina
{"title":"[Visualizing the evidence of robotic gastrointestinal surgery based on guideline recommendations: an evidence mapping study of gastric and colorectal cancer].","authors":"Q Wang, M M Niu, R S Li, S Q Wang, Galyna Shabat, Alberto Aiolfi, J H Tian, K W Jiang, X N Liu, Luigi Bonavina","doi":"10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20250619-00229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robotic surgery, as an increasingly widespread application in the treatment of gastric and colorectal cancer, still faces obvious discrepancies in recommendations, indications, and evidence strength across existing guidelines. This study systematically analyzed 31 relevant guidelines and consensus statements (retrieved from Chinese and English databases from January 2010 to May 2025) from two dimensions: feasibility (effectiveness, safety, etc.) and training quality control.The results showed that colorectal cancer guidelines had a higher proportion (4 guidelines) of \"clear recommendations\" for robotic surgery, while gastric cancer guidelines predominantly presented \"conditional recommendations\" or no recommendations. In the training and quality control dimension, although structured suggestions received positive recommendations, more than half were based on low or very low-quality evidence. Evidence mapping indicated insufficient matching between \"case-specific recommendations\" and evidence grades in the feasibility dimension, while training processes emphasized the importance of standardized systems and team collaboration.The study highlights the existing heterogeneity in evidence-based guidelines for robotic gastrointestinal surgery, with colorectal cancer demonstrating a more mature evidence base and gastric cancer showing notable evidence gaps. It is recommended that future guideline development should strengthen the consistency between recommendation grades and evidence levels, promote high-quality research in upper gastrointestinal surgery, and improve surgeon training and certification systems to facilitate standardized clinical translation of robotic gastrointestinal surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":23959,"journal":{"name":"中华胃肠外科杂志","volume":"28 8","pages":"927-936"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华胃肠外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20250619-00229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Robotic surgery, as an increasingly widespread application in the treatment of gastric and colorectal cancer, still faces obvious discrepancies in recommendations, indications, and evidence strength across existing guidelines. This study systematically analyzed 31 relevant guidelines and consensus statements (retrieved from Chinese and English databases from January 2010 to May 2025) from two dimensions: feasibility (effectiveness, safety, etc.) and training quality control.The results showed that colorectal cancer guidelines had a higher proportion (4 guidelines) of "clear recommendations" for robotic surgery, while gastric cancer guidelines predominantly presented "conditional recommendations" or no recommendations. In the training and quality control dimension, although structured suggestions received positive recommendations, more than half were based on low or very low-quality evidence. Evidence mapping indicated insufficient matching between "case-specific recommendations" and evidence grades in the feasibility dimension, while training processes emphasized the importance of standardized systems and team collaboration.The study highlights the existing heterogeneity in evidence-based guidelines for robotic gastrointestinal surgery, with colorectal cancer demonstrating a more mature evidence base and gastric cancer showing notable evidence gaps. It is recommended that future guideline development should strengthen the consistency between recommendation grades and evidence levels, promote high-quality research in upper gastrointestinal surgery, and improve surgeon training and certification systems to facilitate standardized clinical translation of robotic gastrointestinal surgery.

[基于指南建议的机器人胃肠手术证据可视化:胃癌和结直肠癌的证据图谱研究]。
机器人手术在胃癌和结直肠癌治疗中的应用越来越广泛,但在现有指南中,在推荐、适应症和证据强度方面仍存在明显差异。本研究从可行性(有效性、安全性等)和培训质量控制两个维度系统分析了31项相关指南和共识声明(检索自2010年1月至2025年5月的中英文数据库)。结果显示,结直肠癌指南中“明确推荐”机器人手术的比例更高(4份指南),而胃癌指南以“有条件推荐”或不推荐为主。在培训和质量控制方面,尽管结构化建议得到了积极的建议,但超过一半的建议是基于低质量或非常低质量的证据。证据图谱表明,在可行性维度上,“具体案例建议”与证据等级之间的匹配不足,而培训过程强调了标准化系统和团队协作的重要性。该研究强调了机器人胃肠手术循证指南存在的异质性,结直肠癌的证据基础更为成熟,胃癌的证据差距明显。建议未来指南的制定应加强推荐等级和证据水平之间的一致性,促进上消化道手术的高质量研究,完善外科医生培训和认证制度,以促进机器人胃肠手术的标准化临床翻译。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
中华胃肠外科杂志
中华胃肠外科杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6776
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信