ArticleScientific reports2020
Reduced-port totally robotic distal subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: 100 consecutive cases in comparison with conventional robotic and laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic inflammatory response after robotic versus laparoscopic abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with colorectal cancer subgroup analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- 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 · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Safety and feasibility of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a phase I/II clinical trial using the da Vinci Single Port(SP) robotic system.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Comparison of textbook outcomes and postoperative pain trajectories between reduced-port and conventional robotic distal gastrectomy: a cumulative sum (CUSUM)-adjusted propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Single-port robotic gastrectomy in gastric cancer: a narrative review on the state of the art and outlook.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2026Review
- Reduced-port robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy with optimized surgical field deployment: early results of single-site plus-two ports method.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Comparison of totally robotic and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Fluorescence-guided Two-port Robotic Gastrectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023Article
- Reduced-port robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single-institute experience.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Textbook outcome and survival of robotic versus laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matched cohort study.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Choice of LECS Procedure for Benign and Malignant Gastric Tumors.Journal of gastric cancer · 2021Review
- D2 Lymph Node Dissections during Reduced-port Robotic Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery Performed by a Single Surgeon in a High-volume Center: a Propensity Score-matched Analysis.Journal of gastric cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
By overcoming technical difficulties with limited access faced when performing reduced-port surgery for gastric cancer, reduced-port totally robotic gastrectomy (RPRDG) could be a safe alternative to conventional minimally invasive gastrectomy. An initial 100 consecutive cases of RPRDG for gastric cancer were performed from February 2016 to September 2018. Short-term outcomes for RPRDG with those for 261 conventional laparoscopic (CLDG) and for 241 robotic procedures (CRDG) over the same period were compared. Learning curve analysis for RPRDG was conducted to determine whether this procedure could be readily performed despite fewer access. During the first 100 cases of RPRDG, no surgeries were converted to open or laparoscopic surgery, and no additional ports were required. RPRDG showed longer operation time than CLDG (188.4 min vs. 166.2 min, p < 0.001) and similar operation time with CRDG (183.1 min, p = 0.315). The blood loss was 35.4 ml for RPRDG, 85.2 ml for CLDG (p < 0.001), and 41.2 ml for CRDG (p = 0.33). The numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were 50.5 for RPRDG, 43.9 for CLDG (p = 0.003), and 55.0 for CRDG (p = 0.055). Postoperative maximum C-reactive protein levels were 96.8 mg/L for RPRDG, 87.8 mg/L for CLDG (p = 0.454), and 81.9 mg/L for CRDG (p = 0.027). Learning curve analysis indicated that the overall operation time of RPRDG stabilized at 180 min after 21 cases. The incidence of major postoperative complications did not differ among groups. RPRDG for gastric cancer is a feasible and safe alternative to conventional minimally invasive surgery. Notwithstanding, this procedure failed to reduce postoperative inflammatory responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.