Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24909497›Full record

SynthesisSurgery today2014

Robotic Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.

Guoliang Yao, Kefeng Liu, Yonggang Fan

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgery today, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. First 101 Robotic General Surgery Cases in a Community Hospital.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Article
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

3 authors.

Guoliang YaoDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology, 24 Jinghua Road, Luoyang, 471003, People's Republic of China, ygl1982@sina.cn.
Kefeng Liu
Yonggang Fan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSince its introduction, the Da Vinci surgical system for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been the subject of much controversy. Several prospective randomized controlled trials, conducted to assess its effectiveness and safety, have revealed differences. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficiency and safety of robotic Nissen fundoplication for GERD.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and OVID-MEDLINE, from 1950 to the present, with daily updates generated by a computer, to identify all published papers on robotic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD. The meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager Version 5.0. Differences of the overall effect were considered significant at P < 0.05 with a 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI).

resultsFive studies with a collective total of 160 patients were included. Apart from intra-operative and post-operative complications, which were excluded because of incomplete primary data, there were no significant differences in outcomes, including of total operation interval (P = 0.16), effective operation interval (P = 0.95), post-operative dysphagia (P = 0.94), intra-operative conversion (P = 0.94), re-operation (P = 0.43), hospital stay (P = 0.97) and in-hospital costs (P = 0.08).

conclusionsAs current data do not clarify the advantages of the Da Vinci surgical system in Nissen fundoplication for GERD, we believe that a large a multi-center controlled trial is warranted.

Indexed as

Databases, BibliographicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDeglutition DisordersFundoplicationGastroesophageal RefluxHospital CostsHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesReoperationRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.