ReviewVisceral medicine2018
Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: Robotic Surgery versus Laparoscopic Procedures for Esophageal Malignancy.
Review in Visceral medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Video-Assisted, and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Summary of the ROMIO randomized-control trial comparing clinical, economic and patient-reported outcomes between open versus hybrid esophagectomy in the United Kingdom.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- [Robotic esophageal surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Long-term survival outcomes associated with robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Transhiatal robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: unclear benefits compared to traditional transhiatal esophagectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy - a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Conversion to open surgery during minimally invasive esophagectomy portends worse short-term outcomes: an analysis of the National Cancer Database.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- [Robotics and augmented reality : Current state of development and future perspectives].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2018Review
- Augmented Reality, Cyber-Physical Systems and Robotics: Nice to Have or a Program with Future?Visceral medicine · 2018Article
- Oncologic Resection in Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Transhiatal Esophagectomy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe evolution of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) also extends to the field of esophageal surgery and has brought forth the development of several approaches of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Hybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial compared to open surgery and are currently evaluated against robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). We aim to review the current literature regarding the position of MIE versus RAMIE.
methodsA systematic review of the relevant literature on minimally invasive esophageal surgery for cancer is presented. A PubMed search was carried out for the period of 1992-2018 with the following search terms: 'esophageal cancer', 'minimally invasive surgery', 'resection', 'transhiatal', 'transthoracic', 'MIE', 'hybrid', 'robotic resection', 'RAMIE', 'RATE'.
resultsHybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial, especially with regard to pulmonary complications, compared to open surgery. Oncologic outcomes appear equivalent between open and minimally invasive techniques. Currently, the position of RAMIE is being evaluated against other minimally invasive techniques.
conclusionAll minimally invasive techniques confer the expected reduction in perioperative morbidity compared to open surgery. However, MIS is still evolving with regard to specific technical challenges, especially anastomotic techniques.
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.