SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched or baseline-balanced retrospective studies.
Synthesis 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.
- [Robotic gastrectomy: Research progress and practical challenges].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The optimal minimally invasive surgical approach for proximal gastric cancer (PGC) remains controversial. This systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis incorporated propensity score-matched (PSM) and retrospective studies with balanced baseline characteristics (BB) studies. The objective of this study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in patients with PGC. A comprehensive literature search was carried out in alignment with PRISMA standards to identify eligible studies. Short-term outcomes were categorized into four domains: surgical performance, resection quality, postoperative complications, and recovery outcomes. Mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs), along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated as effect size estimates. Assessment of study quality involved evaluating the risk of bias and assessing potential publication bias, while heterogeneity and its potential sources were examined through sensitivity and subgroup analyses. This study included five PSM studies and three BB studies, with a total of 1163 PGC patients. Although RG was associated with a longer operative time compared to LG, it demonstrated advantages including reduced intraoperative blood loss, a greater number of dissected lymph nodes, shorter hospital stay, and earlier onset of flatus and oral intake. No statistically significant differences were observed in proximal margin, distal margin, non-R0 resection rate, overall complications, major complications, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, or reflux esophagitis. RG may provide improved short-term outcomes over LG for PGC. However, further high-quality evidence is necessary to validate these findings and thoroughly assess long-term outcomes.PROSPERO Registration: CRD420251019756.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40549062What 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.