Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39528662›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025

Evolution from laparoscopic to robotic radical resection for gallbladder cancer: a propensity score-matched comparative study.

Changwei Dou, Mu He, Qingqing Wu, Jun Tong, Bingfu Fan, Junwei Liu, Liming Jin, Jie Liu, Chengwu Zhang

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Changwei Dou *General Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Mu He *General Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Qingqing WuGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Jun TongGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Bingfu FanGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Junwei LiuGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Liming JinGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Jie LiuGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China.
Chengwu ZhangGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, 158 Shangtang Road, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang, China. zcwzry@163.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2794-0601

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province LY24H160023the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81902359the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82272697Zhejiang Provincial Medical and Health Science and Technology Plan 2022517591
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of robotic or laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer (GBC) is increasing, with reported advantages over conventional open surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and postoperative overall survival (OS) associated with robotic radical resection (RRR) and laparoscopic radical resection (LRR) for GBC.

methodA total of 109 patients with GBC who underwent radical resection with the same surgical team between January 2015 and December 2023 were enrolled, with 21 patients in the RRR group and 88 cases in the LRR group. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) algorithm was used to compare the surgical outcomes and postoperative prognosis between the RRR and LRR groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors of postoperative overall survival (OS) and complications of Clavien-Dindo (C-D) Grades III-IV.

resultsThe median follow-up time was 46 (inter-quartile range, IQR 29-70) months for the LRR group and 16 (IQR 12-34) months for the RRR group. After PSM, the baseline characteristics of the RRR and LRR groups were generally well balanced, with 21 patients in each group. RRR was associated with significantly decreased intraoperative bleeding [100.00 (50.00, 200.00) mL vs 200.00 (100.00, 300.00) mL] and higher number of lymph nodes (LNs) yield [12.00 (9.00, 15.50) vs 8.00 (6.00, 12.00)]. The two groups showed comparable outcomes in terms of the incidence of biliary reconstruction, the range of liver resection, the length of operation, the incidence of postoperative morbidity, the incidence of C-D Grades III-IV complications, number of the days of drainage tubes indwelling and postoperative hospital stay, and mortality by postoperative days 30 and 90. After PSM, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival rates were 78, 70, and 37%, respectively, in the RRR group, and 71, 59, and 48%, respectively, in the LRR group (P = 0.593). Multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative TB level ≥ 72 µmol/L and biliary reconstruction were found to be the independent risk factors of C-D Grades III-IV complications. T3 stage was identified to be the risk factor for postoperative OS.

conclusionCompared with LRR, RRR showed comparable perioperative outcomes in terms of length of operation, and postoperative complications, recovery, and OS. In our case series, RRR of GBC can be accomplished safely and tends to show less intraoperative bleeding and higher LNs yield.

Indexed as

Gallbladder NeoplasmsPropensity ScoreRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeGallbladder cancerLaparoscopic radical resectionPropensity score analysisRobotic radical resection

Identifiers

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.