Trial reportBMC cancer2021
Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma, a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT-2 trial).
Trial report in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04306458 (Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoraco-laparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer, a Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 56 papers, 3 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.
Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoraco-laparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer, a Randomized Controlled Trial (ROBOT-2 Trial).
Who cites it
56 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Mapping Review of Core Outcome Reporting in Surgical Research for Oesophageal Cancer.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Health-related quality of life in esophageal cancer: a state-of-the-art review of patient-reported outcomes and an evidence and gap map.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025Pooled it
- Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic or open abdominal surgery with thoracotomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: ROMIO randomized clinical trial.The British journal of surgery · 2024Trial
- Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy Leads to Significant Reduction in Postoperative Acute Pain: A Retrospective Clinical Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Trial
- [Modern concepts in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy experience and outcomes from a high-volume cancer center with propensity-matched comparative assessment to the ACS-NSQIP database.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Article
- Evolution and refinements in minimally invasive esophagectomy: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a weighted short- and long-term outcomes analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- Quality and safety of Ireland's first robotic oesophagectomy program.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- A standardized and reproducible rodent model of esophagogastric anastomosis healing following esophageal transection.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study from a high-volume center.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Successful robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery for scirrhous gastric conduit cancer after esophagectomy: A case report.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- Review
- Development in Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: The Current Standing Point of Robotic Surgery.Cancers · 2025Review
- Enhanced short-term outcomes after full robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis procedure compared to the hybrid approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Short-and middle-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for highly locally advanced esophageal cancer with stage cT3 borderline and cT4b at initial diagnosis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- [Evidence for the extent and oncological benefit of lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, radical esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of the multimodality treatment with curative intent. Both conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) were shown to be superior compared to open transthoracic esophagectomy considering postoperative complications. However, no randomized comparison exists between MIE and RAMIE in the Western World for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.
methodsThis is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven multicenter randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 90 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3, M0) esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 218) with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction are randomized to either RAMIE (n = 109) or MIE (n = 109). The primary outcome of this study is the total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes specified per lymph node station.
conclusionThis is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAMIE to MIE as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction in the Western World. The hypothesis of the proposed study is that RAMIE will result in a higher abdominal and mediastinal lymph node yield specified per station compared to conventional MIE. Short-term results and the primary endpoint (total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes per lymph node station) will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient within this trial.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04306458 . Registered 13th March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04306458; Date of first enrolment 18.01.2021; Target sample size 218; Recruitment status: Recruiting; Protocol version 2; Issue date 10.03.2020; Rev. 02.02.2021; Authors ET, PCvdS, PPG.
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.