ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Development of the multiple scope transition method in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a structured narrative review of learning curve, patient selection, and program readiness.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Proposal for grading of intraoperative bleeding and the assessment of hemostasis quality during robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Current Status and Future Perspectives of Superior Mesenteric Artery Dissection in Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Scoping Review of Technical Variations in the Robotic Era.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Mesopancreas-Anatomical Insights and Its Implications for Diagnosis and Clinical and Surgical Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Case Involving a Meandering Main Pancreatic Duct Coursing Posterior to a Replaced Common Hepatic Artery and in Front of the Portal Vein.Surgical case reports · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (R-PD) has emerged as a promising technique for treating periampullary tumors, optimal surgical views across various stages of the surgery are vital. This study aimed to describe the evolution and optimization of the multiple scope transition (MST) method using comprehensive videos and illustrations, particularly from the perspective of the patient-side assistants, to enhance the efficiency and safety of R-PD through its different phases.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 61 patients who underwent R-PD from April 2021 to May 2023.
resultsThe median total operation duration was 599 min (415-840 min). The median scope transition times for redocking from the left to central lower position, transition from the central lower to upper position, and port-hopping from the central to right position were 169 s (53-725 s), 55 s (26-165 s), and 120 s (41-260 s), respectively. Owing to the advancements in the scope transition procedures, these scope transition times became shorter with an increase in the number of experiences. No intraoperative complications relevant to scope transition was reported, and the incidence of significant postoperative complications greater than Grade IIIa of the Clavien-Dindo classification was 8.2%.
conclusionWe reported the established role and evolution of the MST method from the standpoint of the patient-side assistants. The comfortable surgical field expansion provided by the MST method can ensure the safe and widespread application of R-PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39227439What 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.