Publication Name	World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
Manuscript ID	93115
Country	China

Received	2024-02-20 06:38
Peer-Review Started	2024-02-20 06:38
To Make the First Decision
Return for Revision	2024-04-08 22:39
Revised	2024-04-09 04:12
Second Decision	2024-04-26 02:48
Accepted by Journal Editor-in-Chief
Accepted by Executive Editor-in-Chief	2024-04-26 05:13
Articles in Press	2024-04-26 05:13
Publication Fee Transferred
Edit the Manuscript by Language Editor
Typeset the Manuscript	2024-06-12 07:28
Publish the Manuscript Online	2024-06-30 07:39

ISSN	1948-9366 (online)
Open Access	This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Copyright	© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Article Reprints	For details, please visit: http://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/gerinfo/247
Permissions	For details, please visit: http://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/gerinfo/207
Publisher	Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA
Website	http://www.wjgnet.com

Category	Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Manuscript Type	Retrospective Study
Article Title	Comparative analysis of the short and medium-term efficacy of the Da Vinci robot versus laparoscopic total mesangectomy for rectal cancer
Manuscript Source	Unsolicited Manuscript
All Author List	Wei-Ge Gao, Wen Shi, Xu-Chen Gong, Zhi-Wen Li and Yiminjiang Tuoheti
ORCID	Author(s) ORCID Number Wei-Ge Gao http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4277-2343
Funding Agency and Grant Number	Funding Agency Grant Number Natural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region 2020D01C112
Corresponding Author	Wei-Ge Gao, N/A, Doctor, Doctor, Department of Anorectal Surgery, People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, No. 91 Tianchi Road, Urumqi 830001, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China. 36724580@qq.com
Key Words	Rectal tumor; Robots; Laparoscopy; Total mesangectomy; Survival prognosis; Retrospective analysis
Core Tip	This study compared the short- and medium-term efficacy of Da Vinci robot-assisted surgery with traditional laparoscopic surgery in total mesangectomy for rectal cancer, involving indexes such as operation time, postoperative complications, postoperative pain, and postoperative rehabilitation. By comparing and analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical methods, the influence on the treatment effect and quality of life of the patients was evaluated, and the scientific basis for clinical decision-making was provided.
Publish Date	2024-06-30 07:39
Citation	<p>Gao WG, Shi W, Gong XC, Li ZW, Tuoheti Y. Comparative analysis of the short and medium-term efficacy of the Da Vinci robot versus laparoscopic total mesangectomy for rectal cancer. <i>World J Gastrointest Surg</i> 2024; 16(6): 1681-1690</p>
URL	https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9366/full/v16/i6/1681.htm
DOI	https://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v16.i6.1681

Full Article (PDF)	WJGS-16-1681-with-cover.pdf
Manuscript File	93115_Auto_Edited-YJP.docx
Answering Reviewers	93115-answering-reviewers.pdf
Audio Core Tip	93115-audio.mp3
Biostatistics Review Certificate	93115-biostatistics-statement.pdf
Conflict-of-Interest Disclosure Form	93115-conflict-of-interest-statement.pdf
Copyright License Agreement	93115-copyright-assignment.pdf
Approved Grant Application Form(s) or Funding Agency Copy of any Approval Document(s)	93115-foundation-statement.pdf
Signed Informed Consent Form(s) or Document(s)	93115-informed-consent-statement.pdf
Institutional Review Board Approval Form or Document	93115-institutional-review-board-statement.pdf
Non-Native Speakers of English Editing Certificate	93115-non-native-speakers.pdf
Peer-review Report	93115-peer-reviews.pdf
Scientific Misconduct Check	93115-scientific-misconduct-check.png
Scientific Editor Work List	93115-scientific-editor-work-list.pdf
CrossCheck Report	93115-crosscheck-report.pdf