ArticleCancer medicine2023
Short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with high body mass index: A propensity score matched study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. 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.
- Does robotic pancreatoduodenectomy reduce the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Comparing Operative Outcomes and Resection Quality in Robotic vs Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Meta-analysis of 54,000 Patients.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Pooled it
- The Impact of Obesity on Intraoperative, Oncological, and Postoperative Endpoints in Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy.World journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Indirect comparison of perioperative outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Comparison of short‑ and long‑term outcomes between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in overweight patients: a propensity score‑matched study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with overweight or obesity: a meta-analysis protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with high body mass index: A propensity score matched study.Cancer medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh body mass index was considered as a risk factor for minimally invasive surgery. The short-term outcomes of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) remain controversial. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and advantage of RPD in patients with high body mass index compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).
methodsClinical data of 304 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy from January 2016 to December 2019 in Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine was collected. Patients with BMI >25 kg/m
resultsThe RPD group showed advantages in the estimated blood loss (EBL) (323.3 mL vs. 480.7 mL, p = 0.010), the postoperative abdominal infection rate (24% vs. 44%, p = 0.010), the incidence of Clavien-Dindo III-V complications (14.7% vs. 28.0%, p = 0.042) over OPD group.
conclusionRPD shows advantages in less EBL, lower incidence rate of Clavien-Dindo III-V complications over OPD in overweight and obese patients. RPD was confirmed as a safe and feasible surgical approach for overweight or obsess 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.