Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39650315›Full record

ReviewNorthern clinics of Istanbul2024

Advances in minimally invasive liver surgery.

Hilmi Anil Dincer, Ahmet Bulent Dogrul

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

2 authors.

Hilmi Anil DincerDepartment of General Surgery, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkiye.
Ahmet Bulent DogrulDepartment of General Surgery, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As in many surgical branches, minimally invasive methods are becoming increasingly prominent in hepatobiliary surgery. Nowadays, robotic and laparoscopic methods are among the hot topics in the current literature. Both laparoscopic and robotic surgery have better short-term results than open surgery in terms of the blood loss, need for blood transfusion, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, and postoperative major complication rate. In addition to cosmetic benefits, minimally invasive methods have similar results to open surgery in terms of oncologic outcomes. Minimally invasive techniques for hepatocellular carcinoma, colorectal cancer liver metastasis and cholangiocarcinoma, which are the most common indications for surgery, also for donor and recipient surgeries in organ transplantation, can be safely applied in high-volume centers and by experienced surgeons. The use of robotic surgery is increasing especially in major hepatectomy operations. The main advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery are less bleeding, less conversion rate and a shorter learning curve. However, there is a need for studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery, the production of devices such as robotic ultrasonographic dissectors, and the establishment of structured minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery training programs. The aim of this review is to evaluate the recent findings and current evidence on minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery.

Indexed as

Laparoscopic donor hepatectomylaparoscopic liver surgeryminimally invasive hepatobiliary surgeryrobotic donor hepatectomyrobotic liver surgeryrobotic recipient hepatectomy

Identifiers

PMID39650315
PMCPMC11622747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.