Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31288775›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2019

Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: short-term outcomes at a mono-institution.

Shan-Ping Ye, Jun Shi, Dong-Ning Liu, Qun-Guang Jiang, Xiong Lei, Hua Qiu, Tai-Yuan Li

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Comparison of short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted D2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Robotic-World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2020
    Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shan-Ping YeDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Jun ShiDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Dong-Ning LiuDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Qun-Guang JiangDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Xiong LeiDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Hua QiuDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Tai-Yuan LiDepartment of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China. litaiyuanyfy@sina.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2623-4211
Nanchang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic-assisted surgery, a developed technology, is becoming more and more accepted by surgeons. However, the comparison between robotic-assisted total gastrectomy (RATG) and conventional laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is seldom reported, or usually the sample sizes reported are small. The current research was designed to compare the short-term outcomes of RATG and LATG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC in a mono-institution from China.

methodsA total of 205 patients from June 2015 to October 2018 were included in this study. Among them, 106 patients underwent LATG, and 99 patients underwent RATG. The patients' clinicopathological characteristics, surgical performance and short-term outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

resultsThe clinicopathological characteristics showed no difference between the LATG group and the RATG group. However, compared with the LATG group, the operation time was longer (P = 0.000), and the operative blood loss (P = 0.000) and the volume of abdominal drainage was less (P = 0.000) in the RATG group. Moreover, the RATG took less time to remove abdominal drainage tube than LATG (P = 0.000). The plasma levels of CRP at 72 h post-operation was lower (P = 0.000), and the number of retrieved lymph nodes was more (P = 0.000) in the RATG group. Nevertheless, the postoperative length of stay (P = 0.890), the time to first flatus (P = 0.448), the postoperative complication (P = 0.915) and the visual analogue pain score at 24 h post-operation (P = 0.457) were comparable between the two groups.

conclusionsRATG with D2 lymphadenectomy shows safety and feasibility for AGC and could be served as an alternative treatment for AGC in the future.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyLymph Node ExcisionRobotic Surgical ProceduresAbdomenAdultAgedBlood Loss, SurgicalChinaDrainageFemaleGastrectomyHumansLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeAdvanced gastric cancerLaparoscopic-assisted gastrectomyRobotic-assisted gastrectomyShort-term outcome

Identifiers

PMID31288775
PMCPMC6617620
OpenAlexW2961034002

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.