Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40064692›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025

Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a high-volume center retrospective study with propensity score matching.

Qi Liu, Cheng Meng, Shougen Cao, Xiaodong Liu, Yulong Tian, Zequn Li, Hao Zhong, Yuqi Sun, Junjian Yu, Yanbing Zhou

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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Robotic gastrectomy: Research progress and practical challenges].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
    Review
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

10 authors.

Qi Liu *Department of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Cheng Meng *Department of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Shougen CaoDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Xiaodong LiuDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Yulong TianDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Zequn LiDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Hao ZhongDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Yuqi SunDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Junjian YuDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China.
Yanbing ZhouDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China. qdfyzhouyanbing@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3683-1565

Funding

China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2024M751571Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province ZR2023QH103Qingdao Postdoctoral Science Foundation QDBSH20240101031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) can benefit patient survival, few studies have compared the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for AGC after NAT.

methodsThe clinical data of 321 AGC patients who received NATs and who underwent robotic gastrectomy (RG, n = 109) or laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG, n = 212) between May 2017 and September 2022 were collected and analyzed retrospectively at our center. After propensity score matching (PSM) for 1:1 matching to eliminate bias, both groups had 106 cases. Short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival-related indicators were compared between the two groups of patients.

resultsA total of 212 patients were included in the groups after matching. There were fewer overall complications (13.2% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.007) and surgical complications (8.5% vs. 17.9%, P = 0.043) in the RG group than in the LG group. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had more harvested overall lymph nodes (35.25 ± 4.99 vs. 31.45 ± 6.31, P < 0.001) and more suprapancreatic lymph nodes (13.12 ± 4.38 vs. 10.05 ± 4.13, P < 0.001). Patients in the RG group had significantly shorter surgery times (217.62 ± 47.49 vs. 267.25 ± 70.68, P < 0.001) and less blood loss (46.51 ± 27.02 vs. 70.75 ± 37.25, P < 0.001) than patients in the LG group. The RG group had significantly faster bowel function recovery, earlier liquid diet, and shorter hospital stay. Compared with LG, RG had a better 3-year RFS (75.5% vs. 62.3%, P = 0.017).

conclusionCompared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery significantly increased the number of lymph node dissected, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative surgical complications rate. Although RG did not statistically improve 3-year overall survival, there was a significant improvement in RFS and could be an alternative surgical method for GC patients after NAC.

Indexed as

GastrectomyLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresStomach NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeGastric cancerLaparoscopic gastrectomyNeoadjuvant chemotherapyRobotic gastrectomy

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.