Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25552231›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015

A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy.

Giovanni Butturini, Isacco Damoli, Lorenzo Crepaz, Giuseppe Malleo, Giovanni Marchegiani, Despoina Daskalaki, Alessandro Esposito, Sara Cingarlini, Roberto Salvia, Claudio Bassi

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Development of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery: an Evidence-Based Systematic Review of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Approaches.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2016
    Pooled it
  10. Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy - The first meta-analysis.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2016
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Robotic pancreatic surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Observational
  20. ROBOTIC ASSISTED VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2023
    Article

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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Giovanni ButturiniGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. giovanni.butturini@ospedaleuniverona.it.
Isacco DamoliGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Lorenzo CrepazGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Giuseppe MalleoGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Giovanni MarchegianiGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Despoina DaskalakiGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Alessandro EspositoGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Sara CingarliniDepartment of Oncology, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Roberto SalviaGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
Claudio BassiGeneral Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy.
University Hospital Foundation · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasing in popularity thanks to the benefits that have been recently demonstrated by many authors. The Da Vinci(®) Surgical System could overcome some limits of laparoscopy, helping the surgeons to perform safer and faster difficult procedures. Nowadays, prospective clinical trials comparing LDP to robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) are lacking. The aim of this study is to present a prospective comparison between the two techniques.

methodsSince November 2011, all patients suitable for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were assigned either to LDP or RDP, depending on the availability of the Da Vinci(®) Surgical System for our Surgical Unit. Demographics, clinical, and intra- and postoperative data, including estimated costs of the procedure, were prospectively collected. Follow-up included cross-sectional imaging ended on April 2014.

resultsTwenty-two patients underwent RDP and 21 LDP; patients' characteristics were similar. The median operative time was longer and procedures' cost was double in RDP group. The conversion to open rate and the median length of postoperative hospital stay were 4.5 % and 7 days, respectively, in both groups. Pancreatic fistula developed in 57.1 % (12/21) and 50 % (11/22) of LDP and RDP, respectively (p = 0.870), being grade A the most frequent. Mortality was nil and an R0 resection was achieved in all Patients. The overall number of lymph nodes harvested was similar between the two groups.

conclusionsBoth RDP and LDP are valid techniques for the treatment of distal pancreatic tumors. The advantages of RDP are claimed by many but still under investigation. Some of these advantages are more subjective than objective, and it seems difficult to demonstrate a real superiority of one technique over the other in a standardized fashion. In our experience, laparoscopy has not been abandoned in favor of the robot: we continue to perform both approaches choosing upon single patient's characteristics.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsProspective StudiesRoboticsYoung AdultDistal pancreatectomyLaparoscopyPancreatic surgeryProspective studyRobot-assisted surgeryRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID25552231
OpenAlexW2090061132

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.