SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2018
Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy: What is the Best "Choice"? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Non-randomized Comparative Studies.
Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 7 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does robotic pancreatoduodenectomy reduce the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Minimal Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Trial sequential meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: is it the time to stop the randomization?Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Blumgart Anastomosis After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. A Comprehensive Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression.World journal of surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review and updated network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.Updates in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy provides better histopathological outcomes as compared to its open counterpart: a meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with benign and malignant periampullary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Review of Contemporary Evidence on Surgical Outcomes and Learning Curve.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Review
- Indirect comparison of perioperative outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
- Safety and learning curve of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with limited robotic platform access: a propensity score-matched comparison with open surgery in a high-volume center.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- The safety and feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multicenter retrospective assessment of 425 patients in Japan.Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2025Article
- Effects of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy on Short-Term Surgical Outcomes and Postoperative Nutritional and Immunological Statuses: A Single-Institution Propensity Score-Matched Study.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of open and laparoscopic assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2024Article
- Effect of insurance status on perioperative outcomes after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity-score matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Which one is better? Laparoscopic versus robotic reconstruction in the remnant soft pancreas with a small pancreatic duct following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a multicenter study with propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Usefulness of the new articulating laparoscopic instrument in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2022Article
- Comparing Minimally Invasive and Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: a Win Ratio Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Article
- Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy with the da Vinci Xi: can the costs of advanced technology be offset by clinical advantages? A case-matched cost analysis versus open approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Open pancreaticoduodenectomy: setting the benchmark of time to functional recovery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany mini-invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) techniques have been reported, but their advantages with respect to an open technique (OPD) and with respect to each other are unclear.
methodA systematic literature search of studies comparing different types of MIPD was carried out: laparoscopic-assisted (LAPD), totally robotic (TRPD), totally laparoscopic (TLPD) or totally laparoscopic-robotic assisted (TLPD-RA) to OPD. The primary endpoint was postoperative mortality. The secondary endpoints were intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes. A network meta-analysis was designed to generate direct, indirect and mixed estimate effects, between different approaches, for each variable. The effects were reported as pairwise comparisons and hierarchical ranking as to each approach could be the best or the worst for each outcome, expressed by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.
resultsTwenty studies were identified, involving 2759 patients: 1813 OPDs, 81 LAPDs, 505 TRPDs, 224 TLPDs and 136 TLPD-RAs. No differences regarding postoperative mortality were found in pairwise comparison. The LAPD technique had a high probability of being the worst approach, while TRPD had a high probability of being one of the best. Regarding the secondary endpoints, OPD was the best regarding operative time and postoperative bleeding, but the worst regarding blood loss and wound infection. The TRPD or TLPD-RA techniques seemed to be the best for delayed gastric emptying, length of hospital stay, harvested lymph nodes and postoperative morbidity. The TLPD technique was often the worst approach, especially for overall and major complications, postoperative bleeding and biliary leak.
conclusionThe safest MIPDs are those involving a robotic system which seems to have a promising role in ameliorating the outcomes of OPD, especially when compared to a laparoscopic approach.
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.