ArticleChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu2025
Impact of robotic surgery proportion among minimally invasive gastrectomy on surgical complications.
Article in Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological, perioperative, and renal functional outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of total robotic distal gastrectomy and robot-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Safety of robotic gastrectomy (RG) compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer remains uncertain on a national scale, with limited comparative studies across institutions. This study aims to compare the morbidity rates between RG and LG using data from a nationwide survey. Methods: We utilized data from the Korean Gastric Cancer Association's 2019 nationwide survey. The proportion of robotic surgeries in minimally invasive surgery at each institution was classified using a cut-off value of 10%, and defined as high robotic proportion cohort and low robotic proportion cohort. We analyzed surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy in each cohort using propensity score matching (PSM). To account for potential clustering effects within hospitals, we employed Generalized Estimating Equations with hospital as the clustering variable. Results: This study included 776 patients who underwent RG and 7,804 patients who underwent LG for gastric cancer. In low robotic proportion cohort, RG had a longer operation time (P<0.001) but similar blood loss (P=0.792) compared to LG. In the high robotic proportion cohort, RG showed longer operation time (P<0.001), less blood loss (P<0.001), and shorter hospital stays (P<0.001) compared to LG. Additionally, RG in the high robotic proportion cohort had shorter operative time (P<0.001) and less blood loss (P=0.024) compared with that in the low robotic proportion cohort. Conclusions: RG demonstrated comparable perioperative outcomes to LG in a nationwide PSM analysis. However, RG offers limited benefits over LG at institutions with lower frequencies of RG use.
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.