ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
A standardized protocol for robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: improving efficiency and reducing costs.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Improving efficiency in robotic-assisted surgery: a practical guide for surgeons.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Advances in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy-An Overview of Recent Developments and a Novel Classification of Innovations in Treatment of Thoracic Esophageal Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer: an update on experiences from a tertiary cancer care center in India.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has shown potential benefits over conventional procedures for esophageal cancer. However, uniform surgical protocols are lacking, leading to variability in outcomes and increased costs. This retrospective study included 180 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent RAMIE between May 2018 and September 2024. A standardized approach, termed counterclockwise partitioned mediastinal dissection (CPMD), was introduced in 114 of these cases. Perioperative parameters including operative time, blood loss, complications, and cost of disposable instruments, were compared between patients treated before and after protocol standardization. Among the 114 patients who received the standardized RAMIE protocol, the median thoracic console time significantly decreased to 148 min, with overall blood loss reduced to 62 ml. No conversions to open surgery were required in either cohort. Compared to the pre-standardization group, postoperative complications-including recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis-were lower and only one patient needed reoperation. Importantly, reusing robotic instruments from the thoracic phase in the abdominal phase reduced disposable instrument costs, resulting in a savings of approximately 168,000 Japanese Yen (USD 1050) per case. Implementing a standardized RAMIE protocol enhances procedural efficiency, reduces blood loss, and lowers costs without compromising surgical or oncological outcomes. This approach may facilitate broader adoption of RAMIE as a safe and cost-effective strategy for esophageal cancer surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40063141What 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.