ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Robotic sectionectomy versus robotic hemihepatectomy for anatomic liver resection: a comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy: a post hoc analysis of the ROC'N'ROLL randomized controlled trial.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 right living donor hepatectomy with intermittent inflow occlusion: true clinical benefit or just another chapter in the ischemic preconditioning story?Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Robotic Central Hepatectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- [Multimorbidity in liver surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sectionectomy is a parenchma-sparing alternative to (extended) right or left hemihepatectomy. However, the effectiveness and safety of robotic sectionectomy (RS) versus robotic (extended) hemihepatectomy (RH) for the treatment of liver tumors remains unclear. We reviewed our prospective database for consecutive patients who had undergone robotic hepatectomies between March 2021 and July 2023 and included all patients with RS and RH. Demographic data, perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes were analyzed and compared between both groups. Thirty patients met our inclusion criteria, of whom 16 patients underwent RS as opposed to 14 patients who underwent RH. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the study groups. The duration of Pringle maneuver was significantly longer in the RS group, while the remaining operative details were comparable. There were no significant differences in posthepatectomy outcomes between the study groups. All patients had negative resection margins. RS is a safe and effective parenchyma-sparing treatment modality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38703346What 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.