ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Robotic or laparoscopic repeat hepatectomy after open hepatectomy: a cohort study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and efficacy of robotic repeat hepatectomy compared to laparoscopic and open repeat hepatectomy: a retrospective comparative study.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy: a post hoc analysis of the ROC'N'ROLL randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- [500 minimally invasive liver resections-Experiences, results and technical developments of a high-volume center].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Continuous Robotic Ultrasound Hepatectomy (CRUSH): A Novel Approach for Parenchyma-Sparing Liver Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive hepatectomy in ambulatory surgery: a retrospective study on prospectively collected data in a consecutive patient cohort.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Does complexity compromise outcomes in robotic hepatectomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Safety of robotic hepatic parenchymal transection using scissor hepatectomy and alternative techniques: a cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic versus open liver resection: comparison of postoperative outcomes according to the IWATE difficulty score.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- What matters in laparoscopic hepatectomy for lesions located in posterosuperior segments? Initial experiences and analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications: a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Transabdominal Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy and CT-Guided Percutaneous Cryoablation for the Treatment of De Novo Kidney Tumors After Liver Transplantation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- [Multimorbidity in liver surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety of minimally invasive R1 vascular surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: a cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The tumor distance to the main hepatic vessels is a predictor of recurrence-free survival and overall survival in hepatocellular cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver malignancies (ROC'N'ROLL): a single-centre, randomised, controlled, single-blinded clinical trial.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepeat hepatectomies are technically complex procedures. The evidence of robotic or laparoscopic (= minimally invasive) repeat hepatectomies (MIRH) after previous open hepatectomy is poor. Therefore, we compared postoperative outcomes of MIRH vs open repeat hepatectomies (ORH) in patients with liver tumors after previous open liver resections.
methodsConsecutive patients who underwent repeat hepatectomies after open liver resections were identified from a prospective database between April 2018 and May 2023. Postoperative complications were graded in line with the Clavien-Dindo classification. We stratified patients by intention to treat into MIRH or ORH and compared outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define variables associated with the utilization of a minimally invasive approach.
resultsAmong 46 patients included, 20 (43%) underwent MIRH and 26 (57%) ORH. Twenty-seven patients had advanced or expert repeat hepatectomies (59%) according to the IWATE criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The use of a minimally invasive approach was not dependent on preoperative or intraoperative variables. All patients had negative resection margins on final histology. MIRH was associated with less blood loss (450 ml, IQR (interquartile range): 200-600 vs 600 ml, IQR: 400-1500 ml, P = 0.032), and shorter length of stay (5 days, IQR: 4-7 vs 7 days, IQR: 5-9 days, P = 0.041). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (P = 0.298).
conclusionsMIRH is feasible after previous open hepatectomy and a safe alternative approach to ORH. (German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00032183).
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.