Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2022
Randomized controlled trial of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic fundoplication: 12 years follow-up.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Da Vinci-assisted vs laparoscopic nissen fundoplication for GERD: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on patient-reported outcomes, dysphagia, and long-term failure.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robot-assisted surgery in thoracic and visceral indications: an updated systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Evidence mapping on how to perform an optimal surgical repair of large hiatal hernias.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus robotic abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Robot-Assisted Antireflux Surgery in Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Disease and Hiatal Hernia: Beyond Platform Comparison Towards Selective Clinical Value.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Review
- Analysis of outcomes of reoperative fundoplication in more than 500 patients after failed primary antireflux surgery: Experience over two decades.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Article
- Current pharmacological and procedural treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: comprehensive review.BJS open · 2025Review
- Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic antireflux surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis of perioperative and medium-term outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The impact of robotic surgery on the treatment of benign esophageal and gastric disease: early experience of a specialized unit.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic techniques in hiatal hernia and crural repair: a review of current evidence and outcomes.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Review
- Article
- Robotic-assisted foregut surgery is associated with lower rates of complication and shorter post-operative length of stay.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Robotic single port anti-reflux surgery: Initial worldwide experience of two cases with a novel surgical approach to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsNumerous reports have addressed the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted (RALF) and conventional laparoscopic fundoplication (CLF). Long-term follow-up after direct comparison of these two minimally invasive approaches is scarce. The aim of the present study was to assess long-term disease-specific symptoms and quality of life (QOL) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treated with RALF or CLF after 12 years in the randomized ROLAF trial.
methodsIn the ROLAF trial 40 patients with GERD were randomized to RALF (n = 20) or CLF (n = 20) between August 2004 and December 2005. At 12 years after surgery, all patients were invited to complete the standardized Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and the Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia questionnaire (QOLRAD). Failure of treatment was assessed according to Lundell score.
resultsThe GSRS score was similar for RALF (n = 15) and CLF (n = 15) at 12 years´ follow-up (2.1 ± 0.7 vs. 2.2 ± 1.3, p = 0.740). There was no difference in QOLRAD score (RALF 6.4 ± 1.2; CLF 6.4 ± 1.5, p = 0.656) and the QOLRAD score sub items. Long-term failure of treatment according to the definition by Lundell was not different between RALF and CLF [46% (6/13) vs. 33% (4/12), p = 0.806].
conclusionIn accordance with previous short-term outcome studies, the long-term results 12 years after surgery showed no difference between RALF and CLF regarding postoperative symptoms, QOL and failure of treatment. Relief of symptoms and patient satisfaction were high after both procedures on the long-term. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00014690 ( https://www.drks.de ).
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.