Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39387561›Full record

SynthesisJournal of surgical oncology2025

Comparing Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic Liver Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Luis Bouz Mkabaah, Matthew G Davey, Eoin P Kerin, Odhran K Ryan, Eanna J Ryan, Mark Donnelly, Ola Ahmed, Gerry P McEntee, John B Conneely, Noel E Donlon

Abstract readComparative StudyNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Luis Bouz MkabaahDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8251-5291
Matthew G DaveyDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Eoin P KerinDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Odhran K RyanDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Eanna J RyanDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Mark DonnellyDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Ola AhmedDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Gerry P McEnteeDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
John B ConneelyDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Noel E DonlonDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) can be surgically managed through open resections (OLR), laparoscopic resections (LLR), or robotic liver resections (RLR). However, there is ongoing uncertainty regarding the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive approaches like LLR and RLR. This study aims to clarify these issues by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare outcomes across OLR, LLR and RLR for patients with CRLM. Following the PRISMA-NMA guidelines, the meta-analysis included 13 studies with a combined total of 6582 patients. Of these, 50.6% underwent LLR, 45.3% underwent OLR, and 4.1% underwent RLR. The analysis found no significant differences in R0 resection rates between LLR (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-1.26) and RLR (OR 1.57, 95% CI: 0.98-2.51) when compared to OLR. Additionally, there were no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5 years. Despite these findings, both LLR and RLR were associated with reduced postoperative complication rates (RLR: OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.86; LLR: OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.37-0.68). However, patients undergoing LLR were more likely to require conversion to open surgery compared to those undergoing RLR (OR: 12.46, 95% CI: 2.64-58.67). Furthermore, RLR was associated with a reduced need for blood transfusions (OR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.05-0.32), and LLR resulted in shorter hospital stays (mean difference: -6.66 days, 95% CI: -11.6 to -1.88 days). This study demonstrates the oncological safety of LLR and RLR approaches for CRLM relative to OLR, with enhanced perioperative outcomes anticipated following minimally invasive resections of CRLM.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsHepatectomyLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansPostoperative Complicationslaparoscopicliver resectionopenrobotic

Identifiers

PMID39387561
PMCPMC12035666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.