Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2014
Robotically-enhanced surgical anatomy enables surgeons to perform distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer using electric cautery devices alone.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
50 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating safety and quality of robotic-assisted gastric cancer surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline).Journal of gastric cancer · 2025Guideline
- Robotic vs laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with Billroth I and II reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness and safety of robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 12,401 gastric cancer patients.Updates in surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Should robotic gastrectomy become a standard surgical treatment option for gastric cancer?Surgery today · 2020Pooled it
- Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of prospective observational studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2017Pooled it
- Safety and feasibility of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a phase I/II clinical trial using the da Vinci Single Port(SP) robotic system.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2019Trial
- Late phase II study of robot-assisted gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage I gastric cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Trial
- Scientific growth and research impact in robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: evidence from almost 1,000 publications and top- 100 most cited literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of an individualized camera port position adjustment on short-term outcomes in robotic gastrectomy.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Clinical significance of intraoperative amylase levels on intra-abdominal exudates in the prediction of postoperative drain amylase levels after gastric cancer surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Reverse layout of the remnant esophagus and stomach during right transthoracic valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy in robotic esophagogastric junctional cancer surgery.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Reduced-Port Robotic Gastrectomy Compared With the Conventional Laparoscopy in Korea (KLASS-13).Journal of gastric cancer · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Role of Robotic Surgery Gastric Cancer Treatment: A Comprehensive Review by the Robotic Global Surgical Society (TROGSS) and European Federation International Society for Digestive Surgery (EFISDS) Joint Working Group.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Introduction of a new surgical robot platform "hinotori™" in an institution with established da Vinci surgery™ for digestive organ operations.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite recent advances in robotic urological surgery, the feasibility and clinical merit of robotic gastric surgery have not yet been fully documented. Therefore, we designed a prospective, non-randomized study to determine the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) for gastric cancer using electric cautery devices, which are more familiar to open surgery.
methodsBetween April 2010 and December 2012, 181 patients treated by distal gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma were eligible for this study. According to their intent to undergo uninsured robotic surgery, 21 patients were treated with RADG (RADG group) while 160 patients were treated by conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG group). Under a basic working hypothesis that the superior visualization and unique movement of the robotic arms during dissection would be closely associated with reduced amount of blood loss, even though an equivalent extension of lymph node dissection was carried out, we prospectively collected data from patients in the RADG and LDG groups.
resultsAll patients were successfully treated without conversion except for one patient in the RADG group who underwent conversion to laparoscopic total gastrectomy. In comparison with the patient groups, the estimated blood loss in patients in the RADG group treated with electric cautery devices only was smaller, but not significantly, than patients in the LDG group treated with ultrasonic-activated devices, although the same extent of lymph node dissection was achieved. In contrast, there were four patients (2.5 %) in the LDG group who developed a pancreas fistula or intra-abdominal abscess, while no patients treated with RADG developed such complications.
conclusionsRADG using electric cautery instruments without ultrasonic-activated devices is feasible and safe. The robot enables particular surgical views, called robotically-enhanced surgical anatomy, and may contribute to reducing blood loss despite the fact that only electric cautery was used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.