Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31273481›Full record

ReviewGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2019

Robotic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a European perspective.

Gijsbert I van Boxel, Jelle P Ruurda, Richard van Hillegersberg

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gijsbert I van BoxelDepartment of Surgery, G04 228, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jelle P RuurdaDepartment of Surgery, G04 228, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Richard van HillegersbergDepartment of Surgery, G04 228, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. r.vanhillegersberg@umcutrecht.nl.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastrectomy is the mainstay treatment for gastric cancer. To reduce the associated patient burden, minimally invasive gastrectomy was introduced in almost 30 years ago. The increase in the availability of surgical robotic systems led to the first robotic-assisted gastrectomy to be performed in 2002 in Japan. Robotic gastrectomy however, particularly in Europe, has not yet gained significant traction. Most reports to date are from Asia, predominantly containing observational studies. These cohorts are commonly different in the tumour stage, location (particularly with regards to gastroesophageal junctional tumours) and patient BMI compared to those encountered in Europe. To date, no randomised clinical trials have been performed comparing robotic gastrectomy to either laparoscopic or open equivalent. Cohort studies show that robotic gastrectomy is equal oncological outcomes in terms of survival and lymph node yield. Operative times in the robotic group are consistently longer compared to laparoscopic or open gastrectomy, although evidence is emerging that resectional surgical time is equal. The only reproducibly significant difference in favour of robot-assisted gastrectomy is a reduction in intra-operative blood loss and some studies show a reduction in the risk of pancreatic fistula formation.

Indexed as

EuropeGastrectomyHumansRobotic Surgical ProceduresStomach NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeGastric cancerOutcomesRAGRobotic-assisted gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID31273481
PMCPMC6694090
OpenAlexW2956076620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.