Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34471952›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Comparison of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

Wei Wang, Qu Liu, Zhi-Ming Zhao, Xiang-Long Tan, Zi-Zheng Wang, Ke-Di Zhang, Rong Liu

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wei Wang *Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Qu Liu *Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Zhi-Ming Zhao *Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Xiang-Long TanFaculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Zi-Zheng WangFaculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Ke-Di ZhangFaculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Rong LiuFaculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China. Liurong301@126.com.
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CNChinese People's Liberation Army · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRobotic surgery has been increasingly applied in pancreatic surgery and showed many advantages over conventional open surgery. The robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is a surgical option for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma (PNDA). However, whether RPD is superior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for PNDA has not been reported. The comparative study was designed to analyze the short- and long-term outcomes of RPD versus OPD on patients with PNDA.

methodsDemographics, perioperative, and survival outcomes among patients who underwent RPD (n = 49) versus OPD (n = 43) for PNDAs between January 2013 and March 2018 were collected and analyzed

resultsDemographic characteristics were comparable between the RPD group and the OPD group. The RPD group demonstrated a decreased estimated blood loss (100 vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001), time to oral intake (4.0 vs. 4.0 days, p = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay (12.9 vs. 15.0 days, p = 0.01) compared with the OPD group. However, no differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time and the rates of major complications, grade B and C POPF, PPH, grade B and C DGE, biliary fistular, reoperation, and 90-day readmission. No patient died within 90 days. There were no significant differences in tumor size, differentiation, TNM stage, number of harvested lymph nodes, and the rates of nerve invasion, lymph node invasion, R0 resection, and the median overall survival between the two groups (p > 0.05)

conclusionsRPD is a safe, feasible, and effective treatment for PNDA compared with OPD and can be used as an alternative for surgeons in the treatment of PNDA. Further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of RPD in patients with PNDA.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaLaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansPancreaticoduodenectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesOverall survivalPancreaticoduodenectomyPrimary duodenal adenocarcinomaRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID34471952
OpenAlexW3197526012

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.