ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic operation in hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients: a case control study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Open Versus Laparoscopic and Robotic Approach in Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and direct pairwise meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRobotic surgery (RS) has gained increasing acceptance due to its ability to overcome certain limitations associated with laparoscopic surgery (LS). However, the performance of RS in hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) patients compared with LS remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of RS versus LS in patients with HCCA.
methodThis retrospective study included patients who underwent radical resection of HCCA between February 2020 and August 2024. Baseline characteristics, pathological findings, surgical outcomes, and long-term outcomes were analyzed and compared between the RS and LS group.
resultsThe baseline characteristics and pathologic findings of both groups were comparable. The RS group had less estimated blood loss [300 (175-400) vs 700 (200-750) ml, p = 0.008], and lower ALT, AST, TBIL, and DBIL compared to LS group, while no significant differences in postoperative complications. Regarding long-term outcomes, the overall survival rates and recurrence-free survival rates were comparable in two groups (p = 0.77 and p = 0.17, respectively).
conclusionThis study demonstrated that robotic surgery for HCCA generally achieves satisfactory perioperative outcomes compared to laparoscopic surgery. With continued advancements in surgical techniques and accumulation of experience, robotic radical resection for HCCA could become a routine approach in the future.
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.