ArticleGastroenterology report2023
Evaluation of the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted radical resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity-scored matching analysis.
Article in Gastroenterology report, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 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
- 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
- Advanced robotic liver surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Essential Updates 2023/2024: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Biliary Tract Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic operation in hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients: a case control study.Surgical endoscopy · 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
- Is it time to define the scope of safety for robotic resection in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma surgery? A propensity score matching based analysis of a single center experience.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of robot-assisted, open, and laparoscopic-assisted surgery for cholangiocarcinoma: a network meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the outcomes of biliary-enteric reconstruction in robotic radical resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a single-center propensity score matching analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Current advances and future directions in combined hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma.Gastroenterology report · 2024Review
- Robotic-assisted hepatopancreatoduodenectomy and resection of pancreatic tail for one multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 secreting multiple hormones.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The application of robotic-assisted radical resection in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) remains poorly defined. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted radical resection for pCCA in our institute. Methods: Between July 2017 and July 2022, pCCA patients undergoing robotic-assisted and open radical resection at First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) were included. The short-term outcomes were compared by using propensity-scored matching (PSM) analysis. Results: Eighty-six pCCA patients were enrolled. After PSM at a ratio of 1:2, 10 and 20 patients were assigned to the robotic-assisted and open groups, respectively. There were no significant disparities in the clinicopathological features between the two groups. The robotic-assisted group had significantly longer operation time (median: 548 vs 353 min, Conclusions: Robotic-assisted radical resection of pCCA may get a larger total number of lymph nodes examined than open surgery. Provided robotic-assisted surgery may be a feasible and safe technique for selected pCCA patients.
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.