Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40547156›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology2025

Minimally invasive lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer: Could the robotic approach provide any benefits than laparoscopy?

Daniele Marrelli, Ludovico Carbone, Gianmario Edoardo Poto, Daniele Fusario, Mattheus Gjoka, Eleonora Andreucci, Stefania Angela Piccioni, Natale Calomino, Marta Sandini, Franco Roviello

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

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

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

10 authors.

Daniele MarrelliDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Ludovico CarboneDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Gianmario Edoardo PotoDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Daniele FusarioDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Mattheus GjokaDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Eleonora AndreucciDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Stefania Angela PiccioniDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Natale CalominoDepartment of Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Marta SandiniDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.
Franco RovielloDepartment of Medicine Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena 53100, Tuscany, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastrectomy is the cornerstone of treatment for gastric cancer. Since the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, the main challenge for surgeons has been to achieve the same surgical radicality, adequate lymphadenectomy, and negative resection margins as with the open approach. Previous Eastern trials showed non-inferiority of laparoscopic gastrectomy, whereas Western trials reported a higher number of complications. This may depend on the different eligibility criteria to select patients and surgeons. Currently, the increased availability of robotic systems has led to renewed enthusiasm. We present a critical review of published randomized control trials (up to October 2024) to investigate the real benefits of robotic compared to open and laparoscopic approaches. Robotic gastrectomy has shown similar oncological outcomes in survival and lymph node retrieval, particularly in suprapancreatic stations, with the advantage of a more acceptable rate of pancreatic fistula and feasible anastomotic reconstruction. Some clinical situations, such as postchemotherapy interstitial fibrosis and distortion of anatomical planes, may increase the technical difficulty. Only four published trials assessed the implications of a pre-operative therapy, with no robotic surgery cases. Robotic systems may reduce intraoperative blood loss, the risk of conversion and allow more extensive lymphadenectomies in cancers with a high risk of extraperigastric metastases, or with clinically proven para-aortic node metastases, although clinical trials evaluating robotic gastrectomy after neoadjuvant therapy have not yet been published.

Indexed as

Gastric cancerLaparoscopic gastrectomyLymphadenectomyNeoadjuvantRandomized control trialRobotic gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID40547156
PMCPMC12179926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.