ReviewCancers2022
Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Impact of pulmonary complications following esophagectomy on long-term survival: multivariate meta-analysis and restricted mean survival time assessment.Updates in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Article
- Review
- ASO Author Reflections: Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Technical Gains and Survival Signals.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- The Blood Supply of the Stomach: Anatomical and Surgical Considerations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Full RAMIE vs Hybrid RAMIE: a retrospective study on outcomes evaluation and cost considerations.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Development in Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: The Current Standing Point of Robotic Surgery.Cancers · 2025Review
- Evaluating the quality of online resources for patient education on robotic esophagectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- National trends in operative approach to esophagectomy: utilization rates, outcomes, and overall survival.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- A standardized protocol for robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: improving efficiency and reducing costs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: The Present and Future of Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE).Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Evaluating Postoperative Morbidity and Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer Treatment-A Comprehensive Review on Behalf of TROGSS (The Robotic Global Surgical Society) and EFISDS (European Federation International Society for Digestive Surgery) Joint Working Group.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Robotic esophagectomy with function-preserving radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Review
- The Impact of EndoVAC in Addressing Post-Esophagectomy Anastomotic Leak in Esophageal Cancer Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Artificial intelligence enhances the management of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the precision oncology era.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Caseload per Year in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was introduced as a further development of the conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the outcomes between RAMIE and open esophagectomy, which remains a popular approach for resectable esophageal cancer. Ten studies meeting our inclusion criteria were identified, including five retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort, and one randomized controlled trial. RAMIE was associated with significantly lower rates of overall pulmonary complications (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.26, 0.56]), pneumonia (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: [0.26, 0.57]), atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.29, 0.98]), and wound infections (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: [0.07, 0.57]) and resulted in less blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): -187.08 mL, 95% CI: [-283.81, -90.35]) and shorter hospital stays (WMD: -9.22 days, 95% CI: [-14.39, -4.06]) but longer operative times (WMD: 69.45 min, 95% CI: [34.39, 104.42]). No other statistically significant difference was observed regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. Similar findings were observed when comparing totally robotic procedures only to OE. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.
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.