ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Perioperative and Patient-Reported Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Length of Stay and Readmission.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Robotic Cholecystectomy: Outcomes, Safety, and Value in the Era of Advanced Technology.Journal of surgery and research · 2026Article
- Robotic surgery in the application of gallstones and related diseases: a 26-year bibliometric analysis and emerging research trends.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Propensity score-matched multicentric observational cohort study comparing robotic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- Article
- Charting Progress: Clinical Outcomes and the Learning Curve of Robotic Cholecystectomy in Indian Surgical Practice.Cureus · 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
Background: There is a lack of clinical evidence from India that compare robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: This prospective, single-center study compares the short-term perioperative outcomes of RAC against LC. Consecutive patients who were 18 years or older, provided informed consent, and were found to be eligible for multiport RAC or multiport LC were included in the study. Results: A total of 120 patients were enrolled in this study (n = 80, LC group; n = 40, RAC group). The most common preoperative indication was symptomatic cholelithiasis (80% in the LC group and 52.5% in the RAC group). The mean length of hospital stay was comparable for the RAC and LC groups (1.08 ± 0.26 vs 1.13 ± 0.33 days, Conclusion: Our findings indicate that RAC and LC have comparable perioperative outcomes. There are advantages to the RAC approach in terms of postoperative pain and resumption of work.
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.