ArticleWorld journal of oncology2023
Trends of Oncological Quality of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in the United States.
Article in World journal of oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched or baseline-balanced retrospective studies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Trends in robotic upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary surgery in Australia: a private sector-based analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- The value of robot-assisted gastrectomy in the treatment of gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- 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
- Bridging the gap: The role of technological advances in shaping gastrointestinal oncological outcomes.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Survival Outcomes Between Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy in Early and Locally Advanced Gastric Adenocarcinoma in a Western Center.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Financial Toxicity After Pancreatectomy and Gastrectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- What defines the "value" of robotic surgery for patients with gastrointestinal cancers? Perspectives from a U.S. Cancer Center.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Review
- Laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block: how I do it and a cost efficiency analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 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
Background: Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been increasingly used for treatment of gastric cancer in the United States. However, it is unknown if there has been a nationwide improvement of short-term safety outcomes and oncological quality metrics over time. Methods: We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients who underwent major gastrectomy from 2010 through 2018. The short-term safety outcomes and oncological metrics were compared between cases of open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), and RG. We also compared the indications and outcomes of RG between the three periods (2010 - 2012, 2013 - 2015, and 2016 - 2018). Results: Of the 22,445 patients included, 1,867 (8%) underwent RG. Number of RG continued to increase from only 37 cases performed in 2010 to 412 cases performed in 2018. The number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined (OG, 16; LG, 17; and RG, 19) and the R0 rate (OG, 88%; LG, 92%; and RG 94%) were better for RG than for OG or LG (P < 0.001). In the RG group, the number of LNs examined (first period, 15; third period, 18; P < 0.001), R0 rate (first period, 88.6%; third period, 91.1%; P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (first period, 9 days; third period, 8 days; P < 0.001), 30-day readmission rate (first period, 10.1%; third period, 7.9%; P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (first period, 7.3%; third period, 6.0%; P = 0.003) continued to improve cohort over time. The ratio of the robotic cases performed in academic institutions gradually increased (first period, 48.6%; third period, 54.3%; P < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, RG was associated with more than 15 LNs being examined (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34 - 1.65; P < 0.001). The indications for RG appeared expanding to include more advanced stage, high comorbidity, and patients who underwent preoperative therapy. Conclusions: RG has been increasingly performed in the past decade. Although its indication was expanded to include more advanced tumors, we found that the oncological quality metrics and safety outcomes of RG have improved over time and were better than those of OG or 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.