ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients.
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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including patient subgroups and meta-regression analyses.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic vs laparoscopic approaches of pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Competency, Proficiency, and Mastery: Learning Curves for Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy at 16 International Expert Centers.Annals of surgery · 2026Article
- When should the robot step aside?-conversion in robotic distal pancreatectomy: lessons from an international multicenter study.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy as the Standard of Care in the US: Are We There Yet?Cancers · 2025Article
- Institutional learning curve and factors of prolonged operation time of robotic distal pancreatectomy: An analysis of an initial 117 cases.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Is robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy non-inferior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with high PD-ROBOSCORE?Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- A modified multi-angle suture training module for laparoscopic training curriculum on emergency intestinal surgery.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2025Article
- Implementing recycling in the operating room: a single-center experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Study International Multicentric Pancreatic Left Resections (SIMPLR): Does Surgical Approach Matter?Cancers · 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
34 authors at 17 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30.
methodsIn this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias.
resultsOf 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD.
conclusionsIn obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.
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.