ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Solo surgery in robot-assisted gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating safety and quality of robotic-assisted gastric cancer surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based prediction model for prolonged length of stay after laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery: a secondary analysis of the FDP-PONV trial.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Trial
- Surgical team configuration, technical errors, and workload in robotic distal gastrectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Impact of an individualized camera port position adjustment on short-term outcomes in robotic gastrectomy.Surgery today · 2026Article
- [Robotic gastrectomy: Research progress and practical challenges].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Review
- Investigation and analysis of 3-year survival and influencing factors in patients with primary gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical benefits including the postoperative inflammatory status of robot-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared with laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in patients with obesity.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Current status of evaluation and treatment of early-stage remnant gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Predictive model for prolonged hospital stay risk after gastric cancer surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer is still not well standardized. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of solo surgery in robot-assisted gastrectomy (SRG) for gastric cancer compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).
methodsThis was a single-center retrospective comparative study between SRG and conventional LG. Between April 2015 and December 2022, 510 patients underwent gastrectomy, and data from a prospectively collected database were analyzed. We identified 372 patients who underwent LG (n = 267) and SRG (n = 105) and the remaining 138 patients were excluded because of remnant gastric cancer, esophagogastric junction cancer, open gastrectomy, concurrent surgery for concomitant malignancies, RG before starting SRG, or cases in which the author was unable to perform or supervise gastrectomy. Propensity score matching was performed at a ratio of 1:1 to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables, and short-term outcomes were compared between the groups.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, 90 pairs of patients who underwent LG and SRG were selected. In the propensity-matched cohort, the operation time was significantly shorter in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 305.7 ± 74.0 min vs. LG = 340.3 ± 91.65 min, p < 0.0058), less estimated blood loss was observed in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 25.6 ± 50.6 mL vs. LG = 76.1 ± 104.2 mL, p < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 7.1 ± 0.8 days vs. LG = 9.1 ± 7.7 days, p = 0.015).
conclusionWe found that SRG for gastric cancer was technically feasible and effective with favorable short-term outcomes, including shorter operative time, less estimated blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and lower postoperative morbidity than those in LG.
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.