SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025
Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for difficult posterosuperior segments: a systematic review with a meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Open Versus Laparoscopic and Robotic Approach in Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic hepatectomy for benign liver disease: single-centre consecutive series and meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive and open approaches.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Postoperative Outcomes After Robotic Liver Resection of Caudate Lobe: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- Advanced robotic liver surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Anatomic Liver Resection: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Surgery in practice and science · 2026Review
- Better outcomes of robotic liver resection in segment VII/VIII compared to open and laparoscopic approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: a narrative review of principles, technical nuances, and emerging strategies.Journal of liver cancer · 2026Review
- Does complexity compromise outcomes in robotic hepatectomy?Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- [Minimally invasive liver resection-New techniques].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of robotic liver resection in obese vs. non-obese patients: a multicentric propensity score-matched analysis of perioperative outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic Versus Open Caudate Lobe Resection: A Systematic Review with a Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- An Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Patient with von Willebrand Disease Successfully Treated with Robotic Hepatectomy under von Willebrand Factor Supplementation.Surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Robotic liver parenchymal transection techniques: a comprehensive overview and classification.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe outcomes of minimally invasive liver surgery for posterosuperior segments (PS) are still debated. Since the results of ongoing trials focusing on the results of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) in this setting are still awaited, the best evidence currently comes from retrospective propensity-score matched (PSM) studies. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the outcomes of RLR for difficult located lesions and to provide evidence for its use in clinical practice.
methodsA systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LLR and RLR for PS segments. The Medline, Embase and Web of Science Library electronic databases were searched to identify available research published up to June 2024.
resultsFive studies with a total of 2907 patients (RLR: n = 1084; LLR: n = 1823) were included in the meta-analysis. The RLR group had less estimated blood loss (EBL) (MD: - 88.3, 95% CI - 144.2-- 32.3; p = 0.012), fewer blood transfusions (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-0.80, p = 0.033), and a shorter operative time (MD - 27.3, 95% CI - 49.4-- 5.1; p = 0.027). No differences in postoperative morbidity, mortality and R1 resection rates were observed.
conclusionRLR for lesions in the PS segments are safe and effective, and may have superior surgical outcomes than LLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39623177What 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.