ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for complex hepatolithiasis: a propensity score matching analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Economic impact of robotic liver resection: systematic review of costs, resource utilization, and hospital stay.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic hepatectomy for benign liver disease: single-centre consecutive series and meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive and open approaches.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Short-Term Outcomes After Robotic Versus Open Liver Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2023Pooled it
- State of the art in robotic liver surgery: a meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robotic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic surgery for complex hepatolithiasis: A step forward in minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery.World journal of hepatology · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic versus open secondary hepatectomy treating postoperative regional recurrent hepatolithiasis: a multicenter real-world study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Hepatolithiasis: Epidemiology, presentation, classification and management of a complex disease.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- International experts consensus guidelines on robotic liver resection in 2023.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resections for hepatolithiasis: an international multicenter propensity score matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- When Does Da Vanci Robotic Surgical Systems Come Into Play?Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Robot-assisted gallbladder-preserving hepatectomy for treating S5 hepatoblastoma in a child: A case report and review of the literature.World journal of clinical cases · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe indication for laparoscopic treatment of hepatolithiasis is early-stage regional hepatolithiasis. Open surgery (OS) is the traditional treatment for complex hepatolithiasis. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RLS) overcomes the limitations of the traditional laparoscopic approach in terms of the visual field, instruments, and operational flexibility. RLS is thus theoretically indicated for the treatment of complicated hepatolithiasis. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of RLS for the treatment of complicated hepatolithiasis.
methodsFrom October 2010 to August 2017, 26 consecutive patients who underwent RLS and 287 consecutive patients who underwent OS for the treatment of complicated hepatolithiasis at our center were included in this study. We performed a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis between patients who underwent RLS and patients who underwent OS at a ratio of 1:2. Twenty-six patients were included in the RLS group, and 52 patients were included in the OS group.
resultsThe groups exhibited no differences with respect to age, sex, location of stones, liver function, history of previous surgery, or Child-Pugh classification. There were no differences in the postoperative complication rates (46.2% vs. 63.5%, p = 0.145), intraoperative stone clearance rates (96.2% vs. 90.4%, p = 1.000), or final stone clearance rates (100% vs. 98.1%, p = 0.652) between the two groups. The RLS group had less blood loss (315.38 ± 237.81 vs. 542.88 ± 518.70 ml, p = 0.037), a lower transfusion rate (15.4% vs. 46.2%, p = 0.008), shorter oral intake times (3.50 ± 1.30 vs. 5.88 ± 4.00 days, p = 0.004), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (13.54 ± 6.54 vs. 17.81 ± 7.49 days, p = 0.016) than the OS group. At a median follow-up of 48 months (range 7-90 months), there were no differences in stone recurrence rate (3.8% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.356) or recurrent cholangitis rate (3.8% vs. 3.8%, p = 1.000) between RLS and OS patients.
conclusionRLS for complicated hepatolithiasis is safe and feasible with advantages over OS in terms of intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rate, duration of hospital stays, and postoperative recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30350102What 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.