ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Laparoscopic vs robot-assisted gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients with prior abdominal surgery: a propensity-matched analysis.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
No studies have compared the efficacy of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) patients with a history of abdominal surgery (HAS). This is the first study in this field to identify complication-related factors and compare survival outcomes using propensity score matching (PSM) and a competing risk model (CRM). A retrospective cohort study was conducted on GC patients with HAS who underwent radical LG or RG. PSM was applied to achieve baseline balance. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with complications. CRM adjusted by inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) was used to analyze overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) across different TNM stages. PSM with a 3:1 ratio ensured baseline balance while minimizing sample loss (LG n = 87, RG n = 29). RG was associated with a significantly longer surgery duration but a lower incidence of overall and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ 2 complications. Multivariate analysis identified RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.01-0.15), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.01), and lymphadenectomy extent (OR, 95% CI: 2.81, 1.16-7.25) as independent factors associated with overall complications. Likewise, RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.01-0.38), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.02), and tumor size (OR, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.00-1.04) were independently associated with CD grade ≥ 2 complications. Kaplan-Meier analyses based on IPCW-adjusted CRM showed no significant differences in OS, CSS, and DFS between RG and LG across TNM stages. RG may efficiently reduce complications compared to LG but offers no survival benefit, suggesting a potential advantage in perioperative safety for GC patients with HAS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40319425What 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.