ReviewCancers2023
Minimally Invasive Surgery for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review of the Short- and Long-Term Results.
Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 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
- Robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and direct pairwise meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Minimally invasive liver surgery for perihilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a concise systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Transitioning to the robotic era for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: initial implementation and outcomes in a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- Changing concepts in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma resections and surgery.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- [Klatskin tumors-differentiated surgical treatment].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
- Beyond estimates: optimizing surgical strategies through accurate blood loss measurement.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma-A Review of the Current Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Robotic Approach for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma IIIA Type: Step-by-Step Procedure.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Robotic Hepatectomy plus Biliary Reconstruction for Bismuth Type III and Type IV Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: State of the Art and Literature Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery and postoperative systemic chemotherapy represent the standard treatment for patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) for hepatobiliary procedures has spread worldwide in the last two decades. Since resections for PHC are technically demanding, the role of MIS in this field is yet to be established. This study aimed to systematically review the existing literature on MIS for PHC, to evaluate its safety and its surgical and oncological outcomes. A systematic literature review on PubMed and SCOPUS was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Overall, a total of 18 studies reporting 372 MIS procedures for PHC were included in our analysis. A progressive increase in the available literature was observed over the years. A total of 310 laparoscopic and 62 robotic resections were performed. A pooled analysis showed an operative time ranging from 205.3 ± 23.9 and 840 (770-890) minutes, and intraoperative bleeding between 101.1 ± 13.6 and 1360 ± 809 mL. Minor and major morbidity rates were 43.9% and 12.7%, respectively, with a 5.6% mortality rate. R0 resections were achieved in 80.6% of patients and the number of retrieved lymph nodes ranged between 4 (3-12) and 12 (8-16). This systematic review shows that MIS for PHC is feasible, with safe postoperative and oncological outcomes. Recent data has shown encouraging results and more reports are being published. Future studies should address differences between robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Given the management and technical challenges, MIS for PHC should be performed by experienced surgeons, in high-volume centers, on selected 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.