Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24156033›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2013

Robotic versus Laparoscopic versus Open Gastrectomy: A Meta-Analysis.

Alessandra Marano, Yoon Young Choi, Woo Jin Hyung, Yoo Min Kim, Jieun Kim, Sung Hoon Noh

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastric cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02325453 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

A Multi-Institutional Chart Review to Compare the Outcomes of Robotic, Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Gastric Cancer.

TypeobservationalSponsorInternational Study Group on Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastric CancerRan2015 to 2020Enrolled7,000ConditionsGastric CancerArmsRobotic Surgery, Laparoscopic Surgery, Open Surgery
NCT02413476 phase2 / phase3unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Compared With Robotic-assisted and Laparoscopic-assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer on Surgical,Clinical and Oncological Outcomes

TypeinterventionalSponsorwei boRan2015 to 2018Enrolled120ConditionsGastric CancerArmsRobotic-assisted Gastrectomy(RAG), Laparoscopic-assisted Gastrectomy(LAG)
NCT02751086 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Prospective, Observational, Multicenter Study on Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Robotic, Laparoscopic and Open Surgery Compared on Operative and Follow-up Outcomes

TypeobservationalSponsorInternational Study Group on Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastric CancerRan2016 to 2024Enrolled5,000ConditionsGastric CancerArmsRobotic Gastrectomy, Laparoscopic Gastrectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alessandra MaranoDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of General and Oncologic Surgery, SS Antonio and Biagio Hospital, Alessandria, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Yoon Young Choi
Woo Jin Hyung
Yoo Min Kim
Jieun Kim
Sung Hoon Noh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo define the role of robotic gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer, the present systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. MATERIALS AND

methodsA comprehensive search up to July 2012 was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. All eligible studies comparing robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy were included.

resultsIncluded in our meta-analysis were seven studies of 1,967 patients that compared robotic (n=404) with open (n=718) or laparoscopic (n=845) gastrectomy. In the complete analysis, a shorter hospital stay was noted with robotic gastrectomy than with open gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: -2.92, 95% confidence interval: -4.94 to -0.89, P=0.005). Additionally, there was a significant reduction in intraoperative blood loss with robotic gastrectomy compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: -35.53, 95% confidence interval: -66.98 to -4.09, P=0.03). These advantages were at the price of a significantly prolonged operative time for both robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: 63.70, 95% confidence interval: 44.22 to 83.17, P<0.00001) and robotic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: 95.83, 95% confidence interval: 54.48 to 137.18, P<0.00001). Analysis of the number of lymph nodes retrieved and overall complication rates revealed that these outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups.

conclusionsRobotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer reduces intraoperative blood loss and the postoperative hospital length of stay compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy at a cost of a longer operating time. Robotic gastrectomy also provides an oncologically adequate lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality prospective studies are recommended to better evaluate both short and long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

GastrectomyLaparoscopyRoboticsStomach neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID24156033
PMCPMC3804672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.