ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Advantages of a robotic approach compared with laparoscopy gastrectomy for patients with high visceral fat area.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in overweight patients, with obesity, or high visceral adiposity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of East Asian Cohorts.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating safety and quality of robotic-assisted gastric cancer surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BJS open · 2025Pooled 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
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes: robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer patients with visceral obesity.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy using the modified age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
- Association between the inflow pattern of the left gastric vein and postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic gastrectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Effect of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy on Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy for Gastric Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Effect of visceral obesity on outcomes of fluorescence-guided lymphadenectomy during laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer:Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2024Article
- Short-term outcome of intracorporeal ileocolonic anastomosis in patients with visceral obesity.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- How do we prevent severe intra-abdominal infectious complications following minimally invasive gastrectomy for cancer? The usefulness of a novel marker using computed tomography images (minimum umbilicus-vertebra diameter) and robotic surgery.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- Impact of a robotic system on intra-abdominal infectious complications after minimally invasive gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: A propensity score matching analysis regarding visceral obesity.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- Advantages of robotic gastrectomy for overweight patients with gastric cancer: a comparison study of robotic gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy.Surgery today · 2023Review
- Review
- Computed Tomography-based Assessment of Visceral Fat for Predicting Intra-abdominal Infectious Complications After Gastrectomy in Patients With Gastric Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer surgery for obese patients is regarded as a technically challenging procedure. The morbidity after gastrectomy has been reported to be significantly higher in patients with high visceral fat area (VFA). Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is expected to be advantageous for complicated operations. However, whether RG is superior to conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for patients with visceral fat obesity remains unclear. The present study aimed to clarify the impact of RG on the short- and long-term outcomes of patients with high VFAs.
methodsThis study included 1306 patients with clinical stage I/II gastric cancer who underwent minimally invasive gastrectomy between January 2012 and December 2020. The patients were subclassified according to VFA. The short- and long-term outcomes of RG were compared with those of LG in two VFA categories.
resultsThis study included 394 (high-VFA, 151; low-VFA, 243) and 882 patients (high-VFA, 366; low-VFA, 516) in the RG and LG groups, respectively. RG was associated with a significantly longer operative time than LG (high-VFA, P < 0.001; low-VFA, P < 0.001). The incidence rates of overall and intra-abdominal infectious complications in the high-VFA patients were lower in the RG group than in the LG group (P = 0.019 and P = 0.048, respectively) but not significantly different from those in the low-VFA patients. In the multivariate analysis, LG was identified as the only independent risk factor of overall (odds ratio [OR] 3.281; P = 0.012) and intra-abdominal infectious complications (OR 3.462; P = 0.021) in the high-VFA patients. The overall survival of high-VFA patients was significantly better in the RG group than in the LG group (P = 0.045).
conclusionsFor patients with visceral fat obesity, RG appears to be advantageous to LG in terms of reducing the risk of complications and better long-term survival.
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.