Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36171631›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2022

Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients.

Gengmei Gao, Hualin Liao, Qunguang Jiang, Dongning Liu, Taiyuan Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: systematic review and future directions.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Comparison of oncological outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for gastric cancer: a multi-institutional cohort study in Japan.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gengmei GaoThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Hualin LiaoThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Qunguang JiangThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Dongning LiuThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, 330006, China.
Taiyuan LiThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, 330006, China. jylitaiyuan@sina.com.
First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University · CNNanchang University · CN

Funding

the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81860519
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies on surgical outcomes after robotic surgery are increasing; however, long-term oncological results of studies comparing robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are still limited. This study aimed to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes of RADG and LADG for the treatment of AGC.

methodsA total of 1164 consecutive AGC patients undergoing RADG or LADG were enrolled between January 2015 and October 2021. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection bias. The perioperative and oncological outcomes between the two groups were compared.

resultsPatient's characteristics were comparable between the two groups after PSM. RADG group represented a longer operative time (205.2 ± 43.1 vs 185.3 ± 42.8 min, P < 0.001), less operative blood loss (139.3 ± 97.8 vs 167.3 ± 134.2 ml, P < 0.001), greater retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) number (31.4 ± 12.1 vs 29.4 ± 12.3, P = 0.015), more retrieved LNs in the supra-pancreatic areas (13.4 ± 5.0 vs 11.4 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), and higher medical costs (13,608 ± 4326 vs 10,925 ± US $3925, P < 0.001) than LADG group. The overall complication rate was 13.7% in the RADG group and 16.6% in the LADG group, respectively; the difference was not significantly different (P = 0.242). In the subgroup analysis, the benefits of RADG were more evident in high BMI patients. Moreover, the 3-year overall survival (75.5% vs 73.1%, P = 0.471) and 3-year disease-free survival (72.9% vs 71.4%, P = 0.763) were similar between the two groups.

conclusionRADG appears to be a safe and feasible procedure and could serve as an alternative treatment for AGC in experienced centers.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresStomach NeoplasmsGastrectomyHumansLymph Node ExcisionPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAdvanced gastric cancerLaparoscopic distal gastrectomyOncologic outcomeRobotic distal gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID36171631
PMCPMC9520837
OpenAlexW4297477485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.