ArticleSingapore medical journal2018
Early experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery in Singapore: single-institution experience with 20 consecutive patients.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early (≤ 1 year) anastomotic complications after laparoscopic and robotic hepaticojejunostomy: initial experience from a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases: A single-center experience.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- The method of using robotic Harmonic ACE curved shears for parenchymal transection in robotic hepatectomy.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2024Article
- First experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2020Article
- Does preoperative MELD score affect outcomes following robotic hepatectomy for liver tumors?Journal of robotic surgery · 2020Article
- A better route to ALPPS: minimally invasive vs open ALPPS.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Review
- Critical Appraisal of the Impact of the Systematic Adoption of Advanced Minimally Invasive Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery on the Surgical Management of Mirizzi Syndrome.World journal of surgery · 2019Article
- Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Repeat Liver Resection for Recurrent HCC: Comparison with Open Repeat Liver Resection for Recurrent HCC and Laparoscopic Resection for Primary HCC.World journal of surgery · 2019Article
- Early Experience of Pure Robotic Right Hepatectomy for Liver Donors in a Small-Volume Center.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
- Robotic-assisted laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with hepaticojejunostomy for primary ductal stones in nonagenarians: A report of two cases.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionExperience with robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HPB) surgery remains limited worldwide. In this study, we report our early experience with RAL HPB surgery in Singapore.
methodsA retrospective review of the first 20 consecutive patients who underwent RAL HPB surgery at a single institution over a 34-month period from February 2013 to November 2015 was conducted. The 20 cases were performed by three principal surgeons, of which 17 (85.0%) were performed by a single surgeon.
resultsThe median age of patients was 56 (range 22-75) years and median tumour size was 4.0 (range 1.2-7.5) cm. The surgeries performed included left-sided pancreatectomies (n = 10), hepatectomies (n = 7), triple bypass with bile duct exploration for obstructing pancreatic head cancer with choledocholithiasis (n = 1), cholecystectomy for Mirizzi's syndrome (n = 1) and gastric resection for gastrointestinal stromal tumour (n = 1). The median operation time was 445 (range 80-825) minutes and median blood loss was 350 (range 0-1,200) mL. There was only 1 (5%) open conversion. There were 2 (10.0%) major morbidities (> Grade II on the Clavien-Dindo classification) and no 30-day/in-hospital mortalities. There was no reoperation for postoperative complications. The median postoperative stay was 5.5 (range 3-22) days.
conclusionOur initial experience confirms the feasibility and safety of RAL HPB surgery.
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.