ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Robotic Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: outcomes from a high-volume specialist pancreaticobiliary unit within a structured minimally invasive pathway.Surgical endoscopy · 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
- Experience with robotic common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones in comparison to a conventional laparoscopic approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Feasibility of transumbilical and prior caesarean scar access in single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for extrahepatic bile duct stones.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery has facilitated minimally invasive surgery with its enhanced visualization and improved dexterity compared to open and laparoscopic approaches. However, widespread adoption remains limited by steep learning curves. We describe procedural steps, technical considerations, and early clinical outcomes with a 1-stage robotic-assisted cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration. Methods: A single-institution case series of 21 patients undergoing robotic-assisted cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration from October 2022 to August 2024 was retrospectively reviewed. Results: Nine patients were female (43%), and the median age was 70 (interquartile range [IQR] 64-76). No patient required conversion to laparotomy or laparoscopy. Two patients (10%) required postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for duct clearance. The median total operative time was 215 minutes (IQR 180-290). The median fluoroscopy time was 1.5 minutes (IQR 1.2-2.1). We review the bed orientation, overall room set up, and robot arms rearrangements that were required to accommodate the C-arm for intraoperative fluoroscopy. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration is possible but requires dedicated equipment and staff arrangements. Engagement of hospital staff including surgeons, anesthesiologists, radiology technicians, operating room nurses, and surgical technologists are paramount for success.
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.