ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Comparing Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered the gold standard surgical approach for acute cholecystitis, there has been increased interest in robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) as an alternative treatment method. This study compares length of operative time and perioperative outcomes between these 2 techniques. Methods: We identified patients from a single institution between January 1, 2023 and December 31, 2023, who underwent surgical treatment for acute cholecystitis. Gathered data included demographic, clinicopathologic, and perioperative variables. Patients were stratified by LC or RAC surgical approaches. Pearson χ Results: We identified 259 total patients, with 186 patients in the LC group (71.8%) and 73 in the RAC group (28.2%). Females comprised most both groups (LC, n = 125/186, 67.2%; RAC, n-n = 48/73, 65.8%, Conclusions: This study demonstrated that RAC has a shorter operative duration in comparison to LC. RAC also has a similar rate of complications and conversions as the laparoscopic approach. Our findings show that RAC is a safe and feasible alternative approach for treating acute cholecystitis.
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.