Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33068270›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2021

Robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy: results from Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan.

Bor-Uei Shyr, Bor-Shiuan Shyr, Shih-Chin Chen, Yi-Ming Shyr, Shin-E Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

5 authors.

Bor-Uei ShyrDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan.
Bor-Shiuan ShyrDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan.
Shih-Chin ChenDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan.
Yi-Ming Shyr *Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan.
Shin-E Wang *Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan. sewang0408@gmail.com.

Funding

Health Promotion Administration, Ministry of Health and Welfare (TW) MOHW107-TDU-B-212-114026ATaipei Veterans General Hospital V108C-003Taipei Veterans General Hospital V108C-004the Ministry of Science and Technology MOST 108-2314-B-075 -051 -MY3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study is to clarify the feasibility and justification of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) by comparing the outcomes between RPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) groups. All perioperative data and outcomes were prospectively collected. There were 304 (63.9%) RPD and 172 (36.1%) OPD. The median operation time was longer in RPD group than OPD (7.5 vs 7.0 h). The blood loss was much lower in RPD group, with a median of 130 vs. 400 c.c. in OPD group. Based on Clavien-Dindo classification, grade 0 (no complication) was 51.8% in RPD group, higher than 43.2% in OPD. Delayed gastric emptying was only 3.5% in RPD group, much lower than 13.6% in OPD. Wound infection rate was also lower in RPD group, 3.2% vs. 7.7% in OPD. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in RPD group, with a median of 20 days, vs. 24 days in OPD. There was no significant difference regarding the lymph node yield, surgical mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, chyle leakage and bile leakage between RPD and OPD groups. For pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, the survival outcome was better in RPD group, with 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival of 82.9%, 45.3%, and 26.8% respectively, as compared with 63.8%, 26.2%, and 17.4% in OPD. RPD is not only feasible but also justified without increasing the surgical risks and compromising the survival outcomes. Moreover, RPD might provide benefits of less blood loss, less delayed gastric emptying, lower wound infection rate and shorter length of postoperative stay, as compared with OPD.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresVeteransHospitals, GeneralHumansLength of StayPancreaticoduodenectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTaiwanOpenPancreaticoduodenectomyPeriampullaryRobotic

Identifiers

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.