ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Total laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: which one is better?
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 10 papers, 2 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy provides better short-term outcomes as compared to its laparoscopic counterpart: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumors: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Observational
- Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy reduces grade B pancreatic fistula in patients with a small main pancreatic duct: a propensity score-matched study compared to laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of the stapler method on postoperative pancreatic fistula in robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Observational
- Laparoscopic versus robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma after learning curves of surgeons: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Outcomes evaluation of robotic versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matching and learning curve analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: Evaluation and Analysis of Surgical Efficacy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Unplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: short-term outcomes and suggested stepwise approach for a safe conversion.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- A comparative study of robotics and laparoscopic in minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: A single-center experience.Frontiers in oncology · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a challenging procedure. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is feasible and safe. Since the development of robotic platforms, the number of reports on robot-assisted pancreatic surgery has increased. We compared the technical feasibility and safety between LPD and robot-assisted LPD (RALPD).
methodsFrom September 2012 to August 2020, 257 patients who underwent MIPD for periampullary tumors were enrolled. Of these, 207 underwent LPD and 50 underwent RALPD. We performed a 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis and retrospectively analyzed the demographics and surgical outcomes.
resultsAfter PSM analysis, no difference was noted in demographics. Operation times and estimated blood loss were similar, as was the incidence of complications (p > 0.05). In subgroup analysis in patients with soft pancreas with pancreatic duct ≤ 2 mm, no significant between-group difference was noted regarding short-term surgical outcomes, including clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) (p > 0.05). In multivariable analysis, the only soft pancreatic texture was a predictive factor (HR 3.887, 95% confidence interval 1.121-13.480, p = 0.032).
conclusionRALPD and LPD are safe and effective for MIPD and can compensate each other to achieve the goal of minimally invasive surgery.
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.