ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Retrospective analysis of operative time and time to discharge for laparoscopic vs robotic approaches to appendectomy and cholecystectomy.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cutting-edge choices: comparative outcomes of laparoscopic vs robotic cholecystectomy-a systematic review.Updates in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic cholecystectomy approaches: a systematic review and GRADE assessment meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Safety and feasibility of robotic surgery in acute care setting: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery in the emergency setting: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Length of Stay and Readmission.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Are we gaining value? A national evaluation of robotic versus laparoscopic appendectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic Cholecystectomy: Outcomes, Safety, and Value in the Era of Advanced Technology.Journal of surgery and research · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic and Robotic Appendectomy: Efficiency and Cost Comparison.Journal of surgery and research · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of laparoscopic and robotic appendectomy: a multi-hospital retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic emergency general surgery, future or fallacy?: case-matched comparison of operative and clinical outcomes during the adoption phase in a tertiary centre.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Preliminary comparative outcomes of Versius Robotic System-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gall bladder disease: Retrospective single-centre, single-surgeon analysis.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- Safety and feasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic telesurgery in pediatric surgery: a case series.Translational pediatrics · 2025Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Can they be compared? A narrative review and personal considerations disproving low-level evidence.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2025Review
- Establishment of a 24/7 robotic acute care surgery program at a large academic medical center.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Is implementation of robotic-assisted procedures in acute care general surgery cost-effective?Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- Article
- Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted appendectomies and cholecystectomies are believed to increase cost compared to the gold standard laparoscopic approach. Two equally qualified surgeons performed both approaches over 2 years to evaluate intraoperative duration, time to discharge, conversion to open procedure, and readmission within 30 days. 110 laparoscopic, 81 robotic-assisted appendectomies; and 105 laparoscopic and 165 robotic-assisted cholecystectomies were performed. Intraoperative time; laparoscopic appendectomy was 1.402 vs 1.3615 h for robotic-assisted (P value = 0.304); laparoscopic cholecystectomy was 1.692 vs 1.634 h for robotic-assisted (P value = 0.196). Time to discharge, was 38.26 for laparoscopic vs 28.349 h for robotic-assisted appendectomy (P value = 0.010), and 35.95 for laparoscopic vs 28.46 h for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (P value = 0.002). Intraoperative conversion to open; only laparoscopic procedures were converted, one appendectomy and nine cholecystectomies. None in the robotic-assisted procedures. Readmissions, none in the appendectomy group and three in the cholecystectomy group. One laparoscopic and two robotic-assisted cholecystectomy patients were readmitted. Intraoperative times for robotic appendectomy and cholecystectomy were not longer than laparoscopic approach. Robotic approach shortened the time to discharge and the likelihood for conversion to open procedure.
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.