ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymph node dissection during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
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 28 papers, 3 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes: robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer patients with visceral obesity.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Systemic Review and Meta-analysis of Impact of Splenectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
- Long-term oncological outcomes of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a randomized clinical trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Trial
- Long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I gastric cancer: a single-center prospective phase II study.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Trial
- Does three-dimensional surgery affect recurrence patterns in patients with gastric cancer after laparoscopic R0 gastrectomy? Results from a 3-year follow-up phase III trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Trial
- Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy with splenic hilar lymph node dissection: short-term outcomes from a propensity score-matched study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Total Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer.Journal of gastric cancer · 2024Article
- Patient-specific virtual three-dimensional surgical navigation for gastric cancer surgery: A prospective study for preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy shows better short-term advantages: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Postoperative outcomes in robotic gastric resection compared with laparoscopic gastric resection in gastric cancer: A meta-analysis and systemic review.Health science reports · 2022Review
- Advantages of a robotic approach compared with laparoscopy gastrectomy for patients with high visceral fat area.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Comparisons of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy in patients with clinical stage I/IIA gastric cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Fluorescent lymphography during minimally invasive total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an effective technique for splenic hilar lymph node dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Anatomy and assessment of a modified technique during totally robotic distal gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
- Trends in clinical outcomes and long-term survival after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single high-volume center experience of consecutive 2000 patients.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2022Article
- Can a single-port robot be safely used for robotic total gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer? First experience using the da Vinci SP platform.Gastroenterology report · 2022Article
- Risk Factors for the Severity of Complications in Minimally Invasive Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of gastric cancer · 2021Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matching analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic system may have potential advantages to facilitate the technically challenging splenic hilar lymphadenectomy during gastrectomy for gastric cancer. However, robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy is performed infrequently not only because of the limited availability of the robot but also because of its technical difficulty. In this study, we describe our technique of performing robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy in detail to facilitate wider application and present operative outcomes and the follow-up results of the procedure.
methodsFrom 2005 to 2015, 93 patients underwent robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. One patient with obvious lymph node (LN) metastasis received splenectomy and was excluded from the analysis. Intraoperative complications, operation and console time, estimated blood loss, postoperative morbidity and mortality, the number of harvested LNs in total and at the splenic hilum, and 5-year overall survival were analyzed, retrospectively.
resultsAmong the 92 patients, robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy was successfully performed in 91 patients except one who experienced intraoperative splenic artery injury which demanded splenectomy to be performed simultaneously. The overall mean operation time and console time were 287.2 ± 66.0 and 180.2 ± 47.2 min, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss was 141.1 ± 227.0 ml. The mortality was 1.1% (1/92). The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 16.3% (15/92). There was no case of pancreatic fistula, whole splenic infarction, or the delayed aneurysm of splenic artery. The mean numbers of harvested LNs in total and at the splenic hilum were 50.8 ± 18.1 and 1.9 ± 2.6. The 5-year overall survival was 86.3% and 5-year recurrence-free survival was 87.4%.
conclusionThis study suggests that robotic application for spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy could be a feasible and safe method.
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.