ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2022
Robotic Techniques in Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery: An Assessment of Short- and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review on the effectiveness of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy Leads to Significant Reduction in Postoperative Acute Pain: A Retrospective Clinical Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Trial
- Impact of Textbook Outcome (TO) and Textbook Oncological Outcome (TOO) on Survival Following Surgery for Esophagogastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Survival and Pathologic Response After Neoadjuvant Treatment in Esophagogastric Cancer: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Single-sterilization modified-position robotic-assisted McKeown esophagectomy versus minimally invasive approach after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Article
- Laparoscopic approach to proximal gastric cancer using wristed ArtiSential™ instruments: a comparative study of 145 laparoscopic gastrectomies.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Fully Robotic Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy Versus Hybrid Robotic Esophagectomy-A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Sarcopenia worsens overall survival following robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- How to measure quality of surgery as a component of multimodality treatment of gastric cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Review
- Textbook Outcome of Delta-Shaped Anastomosis in Minimally Invasive Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in 4,505 Consecutive Patients.Journal of gastric cancer · 2024Article
- Trends of Oncological Quality of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in the United States.World journal of oncology · 2023Article
- Reducing the Risks of Esophagectomies: A Retrospective Comparison of Hybrid versus Full-Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Analysis of surgical outcomes and risk factors for anastomotic leakage following trans-hiatal resection of esophagogastric junction cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Utility of robotic surgery for Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: transhiatal robotic versus laparoscopic approach.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- The impact of age on long-term survival following gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2023Article
- What Is the Current Role and What Are the Prospects of the Robotic Approach in Liver Surgery?Cancers · 2022Review
- ASO Author Reflections: Modern-Day Implementation of Robotic Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Esophagectomy or Total Gastrectomy for Siewert 2 Gastroesophageal Junction (GEJ) Adenocarcinoma: An Ongoing Debate.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): A review of surgical techniques and clinical outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic esophagogastric cancer surgery is gaining widespread adoption. This population-based cohort study aimed to compare rates of textbook outcomes (TOs) and survival from robotic minimally invasive techniques for esophagogastric cancer.
methodsData from the United States National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2010-2017) were used to identify patients with non-metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer receiving open surgery (to the esophagus, n = 11,442; stomach, n = 22,183), laparoscopic surgery (to the esophagus [LAMIE], n = 4827; stomach [LAMIG], n = 6359), or robotic surgery (to the esophagus [RAMIE], n = 1657; stomach [RAMIG], n = 1718). The study defined TOs as 15 or more lymph nodes examined, margin-negative resections, hospital stay less than 21 days, no 30-day readmissions, and no 90-day mortalities. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox analyses were used to account for treatment selection bias.
resultsPatients receiving robotic surgery were more commonly treated in high-volume academic centers with advanced clinical T and N stage disease. From 2010 to 2017, TO rates increased for esophageal and gastric cancer treated via all surgical techniques. Compared with open surgery, significantly higher TO rates were associated with RAMIE (odds ratio [OR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.58) and RAMIG (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.17-1.45). For esophagectomy, long-term survival was associated with both TO (hazard ratio [HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.60-0.67) and RAMIE (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.84-1.00). For gastrectomy, long-term survival was associated with TO (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.56-0.60) and both LAMIG (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.85-0.94) and RAMIG (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.81-0.96). Subset analysis in high-volume centers confirmed similar findings.
conclusionDespite potentially adverse learning curve effects and more advanced tumor stages captured during the study period, both RAMIE and RAMIG performed in mostly high-volume centers were associated with improved TO and long-term survival. Therefore, consideration for wider adoption but a well-designed phase 3 randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required for a full evaluation of the benefits conferred by robotic techniques for esophageal and gastric cancers.
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.