SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
The role of robotic surgery for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open Versus Laparoscopic and Robotic Approach in Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and direct pairwise meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Minimally invasive liver surgery for perihilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Transitioning to the robotic era for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: initial implementation and outcomes in a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- A Decade of Innovation: Short-Term Outcomes of 150 Robotic Liver Resections.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety of robotic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma in highly selected patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2025Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Robotic Surgery vs. Open Surgery for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Cholangiocarcinoma: The Current Status of Surgical Options including Liver Transplantation.Cancers · 2024Review
- Robotic Hepatectomy plus Biliary Reconstruction for Bismuth Type III and Type IV Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: State of the Art and Literature Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of robotic surgery (RS) for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HC) is under investigation. Surgical resection is the only curative modality of treatment but extremely complex and high risk of morbidity and mortality may occur. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of perioperative and oncological outcomes of RS for HC, across a comprehensive range of outcomes reported in recent literature. Materials and Methods: PRISMA checklist was used as a basis for writing the systematic review and studies' selection. Literature documenting RS for HC was analyzed by searching PubMed and Cochrane Library from 2009 to May 2022. The search terms, either independently or in combination, were used according to PICOT framework. The target population are patients treated with robotic surgical approach for HC. Results: 12 studies with 109 patients were included after screening process. The Bismuth classification in all series except one was: 21 type I, 7 type II, 12 type IIIa, 26 type IIIb and 4 type IV. Mean operative time for a total of 21 patients was 644 minutes. Other two case series reported a median operative time of 375 with a console time of 276 minutes. Mean blood loss for case reports and two case series was 662 milliliters. Blood transfusion rate for all operation was 33.3%. Overall Conversion rate was 2.8%. Pooled post operative morbidity and mortality was 39.8% and 1.8% respectively. Mean LOS for case reports and one case series for a total of 17 patients was 16 days. R0 resection rate for the 11 papers was 74.3%. Seven out of 12 studies reported on the oncological follow up: median observation time ranged from 5 to 60 months, recurrence rate was 52.6% (range 0-90%) reported only in 19 patients (10/19). Conclusions: RS for HC was feasible and safe. However, although this systematic review could not be conclusive in most of the analyzed items, RS for the treatment of HC could represent the best tool for a future meticulous and precision surgery. The review's results certainly indicate that further research in urgently is required on this field.
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.