ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Hybrid laparoscopic versus fully robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: an international propensity-score matched analysis of perioperative outcome.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Stapled vs. hand-sewn anastomosis during esophagectomy: a randomized trials systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic surgery in acute care, trauma, and critical care settings: a dual-dataset, data-driven bibliometric analysis of global research trends, emerging themes, and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a weighted short- and long-term outcomes analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Learning curve analysis across three surgical eras in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Fully Robotic Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy Versus Hybrid Robotic Esophagectomy-A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Advances in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy-An Overview of Recent Developments and a Novel Classification of Innovations in Treatment of Thoracic Esophageal Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Full RAMIE vs Hybrid RAMIE: a retrospective study on outcomes evaluation and cost considerations.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of preoperative diastolic dysfunction on short-term outcomes following robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE).Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- A standardized protocol for robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: improving efficiency and reducing costs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Total RAMIE with three-field lymph node dissection by a simultaneous two-team approach using a new docking method for esophageal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Intraoperative minimally invasive left bronchial reconstruction using a pericardial flap during robot-assisted esophagectomy.JTCVS techniques · 2023Article
- Analysis of training pathway to reach expert performance levels based on proficiency-based progression in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE).Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, little is known regarding the optimal technique for the abdominal phase of RAMIE. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in both the abdominal and thoracic phase (full RAMIE) compared to laparoscopy during the abdominal phase (hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE).
methodsThis retrospective propensity-score matched analysis of the International Upper Gastrointestinal International Robotic Association (UGIRA) database included 807 RAMIE procedures with intrathoracic anastomosis between 2017 and 2021 from 23 centers.
resultsAfter propensity-score matching, 296 hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE patients were compared to 296 full RAMIE patients. Both groups were equal regarding intraoperative blood loss (median 200 ml versus 197 ml, p = 0.6967), operational time (mean 430.3 min versus 417.7 min, p = 0.1032), conversion rate during abdominal phase (2.4% versus 1.7%, p = 0.560), radical resection (R0) rate (95.6% versus 96.3%, p = 0.8526) and total lymph node yield (mean 30.4 versus 29.5, p = 0.3834). The hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE group showed higher rates of anastomotic leakage (28.0% versus 16.6%, p = 0.001) and Clavien Dindo grade 3a or higher (45.3% versus 26.0%, p < 0.001). The length of stay on intensive care unit (median 3 days versus 2 days, p = 0.0005) and in-hospital (median 15 days versus 12 days, p < 0.0001) were longer for the hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE group.
conclusionsHybrid laparoscopic RAMIE and full RAMIE were oncologically equivalent with a potential decrease of postoperative complications and shorter (intensive care) stay after full RAMIE.
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.