Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31781200›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2019

Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Gastrectomy among Gastric Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Short-Term Analysis from a Single Institution in China.

Li-Fei Sun, Kai Liu, Xue-Shang Su, Xuan Wei, Xiao-Long Chen, Wei-Han Zhang, Xin-Zu Chen, Kun Yang, Zong-Guang Zhou, Jian-Kun Hu

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

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Establishing the Learning Curve of Laparoscopic and Robotic Distal Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Li-Fei SunDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Kai LiuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xue-Shang SuWest China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xuan WeiWest China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiao-Long ChenDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3796-9248
Wei-Han ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xin-Zu ChenDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Kun YangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zong-Guang ZhouDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jian-Kun HuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Laboratory of Gastric Cancer, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5754-9147
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe da Vinci robotic system was considered an effectively alternative treatment option for early gastric cancer patients in recent years. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted gastrectomy in our center.

methodsThis study included 33 patients who underwent robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) and 88 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) between January 2016 and April 2018. Clinicopathological characteristics, surgical parameters, postoperative recovery, and the learning curves of RAG were evaluated.

resultsBaseline characteristics between two groups were well balanced. The operation time of RAG was longer than that of LAG (333.1 ± 61.4 min vs. 290.6 ± 39.0 min,

conclusionsRAG was safe and feasible for gastric cancer patients, with superiority in the dissection of No. 9 lymph nodes.

Identifiers

PMID31781200
PMCPMC6855037
OpenAlexW2981550139

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.