Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2022) Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72(1):7–33

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hahn SJ, Sylla P (2022) Technological advances in the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 31(2):183–218

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Birrer DL, Tschuor C, Reiner C, Fritsch R, Pfammatter T, Garcia SH et al (2021) Multimodal treatment strategies for colorectal liver metastases. Swiss Med Wkly 151:w20390

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Singh R, White D, Romano G, Osenda E, Allen S, Dunstan M et al (2023) Factors affecting quality of life in rectal cancer survivors who have undergone laparoscopic surgery: patient-reported outcomes over 10 years at a single institution. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 106(1):13–18

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Karlsson L, Bock D, Asplund D, Ohlsson B, Rosenberg J, Angenete E (2020) Urinary dysfunction in patients with rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study. Colorectal Dis 22(1):18–28

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zhu L, Li X, Zhou C, Tong Y, Liu Z, Huang C (2023) Pelvic floor dysfunction after colorectal cancer treatment is related to physical and psychological health and body image: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 67:102425

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Li K, He X, Tong S, Zheng Y (2021) Nerve plane: an optimal surgical plane for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery? Med Hypotheses 154:110657

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Li X, Zhang H, Hou X (2023) Laparoscopic versus open surgical management in elderly patients with rectal cancer aged 70 and older. J Minim Access Surg 19(4):504–510

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Lim HK, Kim M, Park JW, Ryoo SB, Park KJ, Oh HK et al (2022) Laparoscopic versus open lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in locally advanced rectal cancer: multicentre retrospective cohort study. BJS Open 6(3):zrac068

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Fei Z, Yu J, Huang B, Jin L (2022) Comparison of postoperative laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision on lower urinary tract function in men with rectal cancer. Low Urin Tract Symptoms 14(4):255–260

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dai J, Yu Z (2019) Comparison of clinical efficacy and complications between laparoscopic versus open surgery for low rectal cancer. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 22(3):179–186

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Phan K, Kahlaee HR, Kim SH, Toh JWT (2019) Laparoscopic vs. Robotic rectal cancer surgery and the effect on conversion rates: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched studies. Tech Coloproctol 23(3):221–230

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Miura T, Sakamoto Y, Morohashi H, Suto A, Kubota S, Ichisawa A et al (2022) Robotic surgery contributes to the preservation of bowel and urinary function after total mesorectal excision: comparisons with transanal and conventional laparoscopic surgery. Bmc Surg 22(1):147

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Ryu HS, Kim J (2022) Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer. Ann Surg Treat Res 103(1):1–11

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Liu G, Zhang S, Zhang Y, Fu X, Liu X (2022) Robotic surgery in rectal cancer: potential, challenges, and opportunities. Curr Treat Options Oncol 23(7):961–979

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Li JJ, Zhang ZB, Xu SY, Zhang CR, Yang XF, Duan YX (2023) Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision surgery in rectal cancer: analysis of medium-term oncological outcomes. Surg Innov 30(1):36–44

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Mizoguchi M, Kizuki M, Iwata N, Tokunaga M, Fushimi K, Kinugasa Y et al (2023) Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis using the Japanese Nationwide diagnosis procedure combination database. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 7(6):955–967

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g7647

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Da CSC, de Mattos PC, Nobre MR (2007) The PICO strategy for the research question construction and evidence search. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem 15(3):508–511

Article  Google Scholar 

Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, O’Leary MP, Bruskewitz RC, Holtgrewe HL, Mebust WK et al (2017) The american urological association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 197(2S):S189–S197

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A (1997) The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 49(6):822–830

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chedraui P, Perez-Lopez FR (2015) Assessing sexual problems in women at midlife using the short version of the female sexual function index. Maturitas 82(3):299–303

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Oremus M, Wolfson C, Perrault A, Demers L, Momoli F, Moride Y (2001) Interrater reliability of the modified Jadad quality scale for systematic reviews of Alzheimer’s disease drug trials. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 12(3):232–236

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25(9):603–605

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. Bmc Med Res Methodol 14:135

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, Tong T (2018) Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res 27(6):1785–1805

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Feng Q, Tang W, Zhang Z, Wei Y, Ren L, Chang W et al (2022) Robotic versus laparoscopic abdominoperineal resections for low rectal cancer: a single-center randomized controlled trial. J Surg Oncol 126(8):1481–1493

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Machackova M, Skrovina M, Szikhart M, Martinek L, Bencurik V, Bartos J et al (2022) Urogenital dysfunction in patients after miniinvasive restorative low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 17(3):506–514

PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Liu Y, Liu M, Lei Y, Zhang H, Xie J, Zhu S et al (2022) Evaluation of effect of robotic versus laparoscopic surgical technology on genitourinary function after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Int J Surg 104:106800

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tang B, Gao G, Ye S, Liu D, Jiang Q, Ai J et al (2022) Male urogenital function after robot-assisted and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study. Bmc Surg 22(1):185

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Oshio H, Oshima Y, Yunome G, Yano M, Okazaki S, Ashitomi Y et al (2022) Potential urinary function benefits of initial robotic surgery for rectal cancer in the introductory phase. J Robot Surg 16(1):159–168

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Galata C, Vassilev G, Haas F, Kienle P, Büttner S, Reißfelder C et al (2019) Clinical, oncological, and functional outcomes of Da Vinci (Xi)–assisted versus conventional laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: a prospective, controlled cohort study of 51 consecutive cases. Int J Colorectal Dis 34(11):1907–1914

Article  CAS  PubMed