ArticleWorld journal of surgery2025
Current landscape of minimally invasive pancreatectomy for neoplasms: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pancreatic surgery and length of hospital stay: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BJS open · 2026Pooled it
- Adjusted trend analysis in the adoption and outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy approaches: over a decade of contemporary U.S. data.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumors: a multicenter propensity score-matched comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 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
backgroundTo evaluate recent minimally invasive pancreatectomy (MIP) trends for neoplastic disease and compare perioperative outcomes.
methodsPatients who underwent open (OS) or MIP (laparoscopic-LS or robotic-RS) pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or non-pancreati-coduodenectomy resections (non-PD) were identified from PINC AI Healthcare Database. Outcomes were compared using multivariable regressions.
resultsOS was the predominant approach for PD (87.8%); MIP was more common in non-PD (48.5%) than PD with a substantial RS uptake (11.7%-29.9%). In PDs, outcomes were similar except OS had a longer length of stay (LOS) and lower costs. In non-PDs, MIP patients were less likely to have prolonged LOS, intensive care unit admission, and overall complications than OS. Conversion to OS was lower in the RS approach than LS in PD and non-PD.
conclusionsMIP for non-PD has become the most common operative approach with improved outcomes; MIP-PD has flat adoption and similar outcomes to OS. Robotics facilitates MIP (PD and non-PD) completion through fewer conversions to open surgery (OS).
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.