Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32415666›Full record

SynthesisUpdates in surgery2020

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence.

Nobuaki Hoshino, Katsuhiro Murakami, Koya Hida, Shigeo Hisamori, Shigeru Tsunoda, Kazutaka Obama, Yoshiharu Sakai

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nobuaki HoshinoDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. hoshinob@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7171-8971
Katsuhiro MurakamiDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Koya HidaDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Shigeo HisamoriDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Shigeru TsunodaDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Kazutaka ObamaDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Yoshiharu SakaiDepartment of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Kyoto University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many systematic reviews have been published to evaluate the clinical benefits of robotic surgery for gastric cancer. However, these reviews have investigated various outcomes and differ considerably in quality. In this overview, we summarize the findings and quality of these reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses that compared robotic surgery with laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. We summarized the results of the meta-analyses and evaluated the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool. The literature search identified 14 eligible reviews. The reviews showed that estimated blood loss was significantly less and time to resumption of oral intake was significantly shorter in patients who underwent robotic surgery than in those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. However, no significant differences in other outcomes were found between the two types of surgery. The quality of the included reviews was judged to be critically low. In conclusion, the available evidence, albeit of critically low quality, suggests that robotic surgery decreases estimated blood loss and shortens the time to resumption of oral intake in patients with gastric cancer. There is currently no high-quality evidence that robotic surgery has clinical benefits for gastric cancer patients.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyQuality of Health CareRobotic Surgical ProceduresBlood Loss, SurgicalEatingHumansOperative TimeQuality Assurance, Health CareStomach NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopyOncologyOverviewRobotStomach

Identifiers

PMID32415666
OpenAlexW3024173964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.