Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38017157›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2024

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for liver malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies.

Zhang-Tao Long, Hua-Jian Li, Hao Liang, Ya-Chen Wu, Sajid Ameer, Xi-Lin Qu, Zhi-Qiang Xiang, Qian Wang, Xiao-Ming Dai, Zhu Zhu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Robotic Hepatectomy for Primary Liver Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. The future of hepatobiliary surgical oncology.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025
    Article
  12. Four clamp-crush techniques in robotic hepatectomy (with video).Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pioneering the future of robotic liver surgery.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhang-Tao Long *Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Hua-Jian Li *Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Hao Liang *Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Ya-Chen WuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Sajid AmeerDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Xi-Lin QuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Zhi-Qiang XiangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China.
Qian WangDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China. qianwang0734@gmail.com.
Xiao-Ming DaiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China. fydaixiaoming@126.com.
Zhu ZhuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Hengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang, 421001, Hunan, China. zhuzhu027@gmail.com.
University of South China · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of University of South China · CN

Funding

Clinical Medicine Technological Innovation Leading Project of Hunan Province 2020SK51818Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province 2021JJ70120Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province 2022JJ70119
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHow different surgical procedures, including the robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR), can affect the prognosis of patients with liver malignancies is unclear. Thus, in this study, we compared the effects of RLR and LLR on the surgical and oncological outcomes in patients with liver malignancies through propensity score-matched cohort studies.

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched using Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords from inception until May 31, 2023. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. The mean difference with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used for analysis of continuous variables; the risk ratio with 95% CI was used for dichotomous variables; and the hazard ratio with 95% CI was used for survival-related variables. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

resultsFive high-quality cohort studies with 986 patients were included (370 and 616 cases for RLR and LLR, respectively). In terms of surgical outcomes, there were no significant differences in the operation time, conversion rate to open surgery, overall complication rate, major complication rate, and length of hospital stay between the RLR and LLR groups. In terms of oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival between the two groups.

conclusionSurgical and oncological outcomes are comparable between RLR and LLR on patients with liver malignancies. Therefore, the benefits of applying RLR in patients with liver malignancies need to be further explored.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHepatectomyHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesLaparoscopic liver resectionLiver malignancyMeta-analysisPropensity score matchingRobotic-assisted liver resection

Identifiers

PMID38017157
OpenAlexW4389080464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.