ReviewUpdates in surgery2023
Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?
Review in Updates in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Why pay more for robot in breast surgery: literature review and analysis of costs.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Real-world management of achalasia and esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction in Italy: results from a national survey.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Full RAMIE vs Hybrid RAMIE: a retrospective study on outcomes evaluation and cost considerations.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for thoracic lymph node dissection in patients with squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Incidence and Predictors of Textbook Outcome after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Two-Center Study.Cancers · 2024Article
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Esophagectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Traditionally, it is performed through a laparotomy and a thoracotomy, and is associated with high rates of postoperative complications and mortality. The advent of robotic surgery has represented a technological evolution in the field of esophageal cancer treatment. Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been progressively widely adopted following the first reports on the safety and feasibility of this procedure in 2004. The robotic approach has better short-term postoperative outcomes than open esophagectomy, without jeopardizing oncologic radicality. The results of the comparison between RAMIE and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy are less conclusive. This article will focus on the role of RAMIE in the current clinical scenario with particular attention to its possible benefits and perspectives.
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.