Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26020107›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of surgery2016

Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma.

Hyoung-Il Kim, Sang-Uk Han, Han-Kwang Yang, Young-Woo Kim, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Keun Won Ryu, Joong-Min Park, Ji Yeong An, Min-Chan Kim, Sungsoo Park and 8 more

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of surgery, 2016. 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 174 papers, 20 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
174citing papers in PubMed, 20 pooled it
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT01309256 completednot on this map

Multi-institutional Study on the Assessment of Robotic Surgery for Gastric Cancer

TypeobservationalSponsorYonsei UniversityRan2011 to 2013Enrolled1,650ConditionsGastric Cancer
NCT03273920 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymphadenectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSouthwest Hospital, ChinaRan2017 to 2022Enrolled1,110ConditionsGastric CancerArmsRobotic distal gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection, Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection
NCT03396354 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Comparison of Surgical Outcomes With Using Integrated Robotic Technology Versus Conventional Laparoscopy for Gastric Cancer Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorYonsei UniversityRan2018 to 2023Enrolled140ConditionsGastric Cancer Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive GastrectomyArmsIntegrated robotic surgery, Conventional laparoscopic surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

174 citing papers in PubMed, 20 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 314 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. Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: systematic review and future directions.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2023
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Hyoung-Il Kim*Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea †Gastric Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea ‡Robot & MIS Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Republic of Korea §Department of Surgery, Ajou University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ¶Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ||Center for Gastric Cancer, National Cancer Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea **Department of Surgery, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ††Department of Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ‡‡Department of Surgery, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea §§Department of Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea ¶¶Department of Surgery, Inje University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ||||Department of Surgery, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea ***Department of Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea †††Department of Biostatistics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sang-Uk Han
Han-Kwang Yang
Young-Woo Kim
Hyuk-Joon Lee
Keun Won Ryu
Joong-Min Park
Ji Yeong An
Min-Chan Kim
Sungsoo Park
Kyo Young Song
Sung Jin Oh
Seong-Ho Kong
Byoung Jo Suh
Dae Hyun Yang
Tae Kyung Ha
Youn Nam Kim
Woo Jin Hyung
Seoul National University · KRYonsei University · KRYonsei University Health System · KRAjou University · KRNational Cancer Center · KRHallym University Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare short-term surgical outcomes including financial cost of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy.

backgroundDespite a lack of supporting evidence, robotic surgery has been increasingly adopted as a minimally invasive modality for the treatment of gastric cancer because of its assumed technical superiority over conventional laparoscopy.

methodsA prospective, multicenter comparative study was conducted. Patients were matched according to the surgeon, extent of gastric resection, and sex. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis.

resultsA total of 434 patients were enrolled for treatment with either robotic (n = 223) or laparoscopic (n = 211) gastrectomy for intention-to-treat analysis, and a total of 370 patients (n = 185 per treatment) were compared in per-protocol analysis. Results were similar between both analyses. In per-protocol analysis, both groups showed similar overall complication rates (robotic = 11.9% vs laparoscopic = 10.3%) and major complication rates (robotic = 1.1% vs laparoscopic = 1.1%) with no operative mortality in either group. Patients treated with robotic surgery showed significantly longer operative time (robotic = 221 minutes vs laparoscopic = 178 minutes; P < 0.001) and significantly higher total costs (robotic = US$13,432 vs laparoscopic = US$8090; P < 0.001), compared with those who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy. No significant differences between groups were noted in estimated blood loss, rates of open conversion, diet build-up, or length of hospital stay.

conclusionsThe use of robotic systems is assumed to provide a technically superior operative environment for minimally invasive surgery. However, our analysis of perioperative surgical outcomes indicated that robotic gastrectomy is not superior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Clinical trials identification: NCT01309256.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdenocarcinomaCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleGastrectomyHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesStomach Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID26020107
OpenAlexW785473301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.