Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

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.