Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36416833›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2023

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic vs Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Fabrizio Di Benedetto, Paolo Magistri, Stefano Di Sandro, Carlo Sposito, Christian Oberkofler, Ellie Brandon, Benjamin Samstein, Cristiano Guidetti, Alexandros Papageorgiou, Samuele Frassoni and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
16.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

90 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Advanced robotic liver surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Robotic Hepatectomy for Primary Liver Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Fabrizio Di BenedettoHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Paolo MagistriHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Stefano Di SandroHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Carlo SpositoDepartment of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Christian OberkoflerSwiss Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplantation Center, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Ellie BrandonDivision of Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Benjamin SamsteinDivision of Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Cristiano GuidettiHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Alexandros PapageorgiouSwiss Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplantation Center, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Samuele FrassoniDepartment of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Vincenzo BagnardiDepartment of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Pierre-Alain ClavienSwiss Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplantation Center, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Davide CitterioDepartment of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Tomoaki KatoCenter for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.
Henrik PetrowskySwiss Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplantation Center, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Karim J HalazunDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.
Vincenzo MazzaferroDepartment of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Robotic HPB Study Group
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Milan · ITCornell University · USUniversity of Milano-Bicocca · ITColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USNYU Langone Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery remain a hotly debated topic in surgical oncology, but sparse data have been published thus far. Objective: To analyze short- and long-term outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Western high-volume centers to assess the safety, reproducibility, and oncologic efficacy of this technique. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving RLR vs open liver resection (OLR) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in 5 high-volume centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a group of patients who underwent RLR was compared with a validation cohort of OLR patients from a high-volume center that did not perform RLR. Main Outcomes and Measures: A retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively maintained databases at 2 European and 2 US institutions of patients who underwent RLR for HCC between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2020. The main outcomes were safety and feasibility of RLR for HCC and its oncologic outcomes compared with a European OLR validation cohort. A 2-sided P < .05 was considered significant. Results: The study included 398 patients (RLR group: 125 men, 33 women, median [IQR] age, 66 [58-71] years; OLR group: 315 men, 83 women; median [IQR] age, 70 [64-74] years), and 106 RLR patients were compared with 106 OLR patients after propensity score matching. The RLR patients had a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 295 [190-370] minutes vs 200 [165-255] minutes, including docking; P < .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P < .001) and a lower number of admissions to the intensive care unit (7 [6.6%] vs 21 [19.8%]; P = .002). Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure was significantly lower in the RLR group (8 [7.5%] vs 30 [28.3%]; P = .001), with no cases of grade C failure. The 90-day overall survival rate was comparable between the 2 groups (RLR, 99.1% [95% CI, 93.5%-99.9%]; OLR, 97.1% [95% CI, 91.3%-99.1%]), as was the cumulative incidence of death related to tumor recurrence (RLR, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.1%-18.3%]; OLR, 10.2% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study represents the largest Western experience to date of full RLR for HCC. Compared with OLR, RLR performed in tertiary centers represents a safe treatment strategy for patients with HCC and those with compromised liver function while achieving oncologic efficacy.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHepatectomyHumansLength of StayMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36416833
PMCPMC9685546
OpenAlexW4309828239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.