Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32494215›Full record

ArticleYonago acta medica2020

The Advantages of Robotic Gastrectomy over Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer.

Tomoyuki Matsunaga, Wataru Miyauchi, Yusuke Kono, Yuji Shishido, Kozo Miyatani, Takehiko Hanaki, Joji Watanabe, Kyoichi Kihara, Manabu Yamamoto, Yoji Fukumoto and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Yonago acta medica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [Robotic gastrectomy: Research progress and practical challenges].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Safety assessment of robotic gastrectomy and analysis of surgical learning process: a multicenter cohort study.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2022
    Article
  8. 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

16 authors.

Tomoyuki MatsunagaDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Wataru MiyauchiDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Yusuke KonoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Yuji ShishidoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Kozo MiyataniDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Takehiko HanakiDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Joji WatanabeDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Kyoichi KiharaDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Manabu YamamotoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Yoji FukumotoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Naruo TokuyasuDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Shuichi TakanoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Teruhisa SakamotoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Soichiro HonjoDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.
Hiroaki SaitoDepartment of Surgery, Japanese Red Cross Tottori Hospital, Tottori 680-8517, Japan.
Yoshiyuki FujiwaraDivision of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago 683-8504, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) to define the advantages of RG over LG.

methodsWe enrolled 209 patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative distal gastrectomy. We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between RG and LG to define the advantages of RG over LG. C-reactive protein (CRP) levels; the CRP-to-albumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios; and the prognostic nutritional index were compared as systemic inflammatory markers.

resultsRG was associated with a longer operative time. The incidence of postoperative infectious complications of grade II or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification was not significantly different between the two groups. Amylase levels in drainage fluid on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group. The incidence of pancreatic fistula in the RG group (4.3%) was lower than that in the LG group (7.5%), albeit without significance. There were no significant differences in inflammatory marker levels either before or after surgery between the two groups. The 3-year overall survival rate did not significantly differ between the RG and LG groups (91.1% vs. 91.1%). Similar results were observed regarding the 3-year disease-specific survival rate (100% vs. 97.1%).

conclusionRG might be feasible and safe for treating gastric cancer from both surgical and oncological perspectives. The use of robotic assistance is associated with decreased amylase levels in drainage fluid, which may reduce the risk of pancreatic fistula and prevent pancreatic injury.

Indexed as

gastric cancerrobotic gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID32494215
PMCPMC7231873

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.