Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40151771›Full record

ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons

Comparative Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Subtotal Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Efficacy and Postoperative Intervention.

Veronika Stefanishina, Sushant B Remersu, Sabrina Elliott, Fnu Sreekanth, Rafael Fazylov, Simcha Pollack, Pratap K Gadangi, Thomas McIntyre, Silvio Ghirardo, Sreedhar Kallakuri and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Length of Stay and Readmission.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  3. Learning Curve in Robotic Colorectal Surgery.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors.

Veronika StefanishinaDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Sushant B RemersuDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Sabrina ElliottDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Fnu SreekanthDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Rafael FazylovDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Simcha PollackProfessor of Business Analytics & Information Systems, St. John's University Hospital, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Dr. Pollack).
Pratap K GadangiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Hospital, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Dr. Gadangi).
Thomas McIntyreDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Silvio GhirardoDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Sreedhar KallakuriDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).
Muthukumar MuthusamyDepartment of Surgery, New York City Health & Hospitals South Brooklyn Health, Brooklyn, NY, USA. (Drs. Stefanishina, Remersu, Elliott, Sreekanth, Fazylov, McIntyre, Ghirardo, Kallakuri, and Muthusamy).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Subtotal cholecystectomy is employed when the hepatocystic triangle cannot be visualized, a surgical maneuver reserved for difficult gallbladders. The current literature compares an open versus laparoscopic approach with little discussion of robotic-assisted procedures. Although the robotic approach offers enhanced visualization and dexterity, its application in subtotal cholecystectomy remains underexplored. This study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomies, focusing on postoperative complications and the learning curve associated with robotic surgery. Methods: This study population included patients from July 2021 to June 2024 who underwent a subtotal cholecystectomy either laparoscopically or robotically with either fenestrated or reconstituted closure of the remaining biliary structures. A subtotal cholecystectomy was defined as a cholecystectomy with failure to control the cystic duct or view of the hepatocystic triangle of safety leading to at least 50% removal of the gallbladder body. Patients were categorized by their operative techniques: robotic or laparoscopic. The study variables included indication, age, gender, weight, operative variables, closure type, subsequent interventions, and other outcome data. Results: In a retrospective analysis of 48 subtotal cholecystectomy cases performed between July 2021 and June 2024, 37.5% were robotic, and 62.5% were laparoscopic. Robotic procedures were more often associated with reconstituted closure (72.22%) compared to laparoscopic procedures, which used fenestrated closure (100%). Postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was significantly less frequent in the robotic group (11.1%) compared to the laparoscopic group (27.1%, Conclusions: Robotic-assisted subtotal cholecystectomy is a practical and potentially superior alternative to laparoscopic methods, particularly in reducing the need for postoperative interventions like ERCP. The findings support the broader adoption of robotics in challenging gallbladder surgeries. Further multicenter studies with larger cohorts are recommended to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

CholecystectomyCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedFemaleHumansLearning CurveMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcomerobotic-assistedsubtotal cholecystectomy

Identifiers

PMID40151771
PMCPMC11949253

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.