ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection in posterosuperior region: a retrospective study of consecutive cases.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic impact of robotic liver resection: systematic review of costs, resource utilization, and hospital stay.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for difficult posterosuperior segments: a systematic review with a meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Does complexity compromise outcomes in robotic hepatectomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of robotic vs. laparoscopic right hepatectomy: propensity score matching and machine learning analysis for outcome prediction.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Indocyanine green fluorescence staining-guided laparoscopic posterosuperior segmentectomy: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2025Article
- The First Report on Liver Resection Using the Novel Japanese hinotori™ Surgical Robot System: First Case Series Report of 10 Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in octogenarians: a single-center analysis.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- Full robotic versus open ALPPS: a bi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Comparative study of operative expenses: robotic vs. laparoscopic vs. open liver resections at a university hospital in the UK.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Measuring success in hepatectomy.Translational cancer research · 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
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive liver resection of the posterosuperior region is considered a challenging procedure due to poor exposure and difficult bleeding control. A robotic approach is supposed to be advantageous in posterosuperior segmentectomy. Its benefits over laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) remain undetermined. This study compared robotic liver resection (RLR) and LLR in the posterosuperior region performed by a single surgeon. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed consecutive RLR and LLR performed by a single surgeon between December 2020 and March 2022. Patient characteristics and perioperative variables were compared. A 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was performed between both groups.
resultsThe analysis included 48 RLR and 57 LLR procedures in the posterosuperior region. After PSM analysis, 41 cases of both groups were retained. In pre-PSM cohort, the operative time in the RLR group was significantly shorter than in the LLR group (160 vs. 208 min, P = 0.001), especially in radical resection of malignant tumors (176 vs. 231 min, P = 0.004). The total Pringle maneuver duration was also markedly shorter (40 vs. 51 min, P = 0.047), and the estimated blood loss in the RLR group was lower (92 vs. 150 mL, P = 0.005). The postoperative hospital stay (POHS) in the RLR group was significantly shorter (5.4 vs. 7.5 days, P = 0.048). In PSM cohort, operative time in the RLR group was also significantly shorter (163 vs. 193 min, P = 0.036), and the estimated blood loss was lower (92 vs. 144 mL, P = 0.024). However, the total Pringle maneuver duration and POHS showed no significant difference. The complications were similar between two groups in both pre-PSM and PSM cohorts.
conclusionRLR in the posterosuperior region was as safe and feasible as LLR. RLR was associated with reduced operative time and blood loss than LLR.
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.