ReviewCancers2025
Current Status and Future Applications of Robotic Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perioperative outcomes of a novel laparoscopic-like "3-arm + 2-port" model in robot-assisted distal gastrectomy in patients with resectable, non-metastatic gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Trial
- Conversion to Roux en Y gastric bypass after sleeve gastrectomy: outcomes from a Middle Eastern cohort.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
- Article
- Environmental sustainability in robotic surgery: a data-driven bibliometric mapping of global research trends, thematic evolution, and knowledge structures (1983-2025).Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Global trends and hotspots in robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for gastrointestinal diseases: a bibliometric and visualization.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted surgery has proven highly effective in the curative treatment of various gastrointestinal cancers. The advantages of robot-assisted surgery, including precision, enhanced operability, and magnified 3D visualization, allow surgeons to perform delicate procedures that would be challenging with conventional laparotomy or laparoscopy. These benefits make robot-assisted surgery a viable modality for treating various malignant tumors and an essential tool in curative surgery for solid cancers. Laparoscopic gastrectomy is currently the standard treatment for early gastric cancer, with numerous clinical trials assessing the efficacy of robot-assisted surgery. Although thoracoscopic esophagectomy has demonstrated advantages over open surgery in radical esophageal cancer treatment, ongoing studies are evaluating the noninferiority and potential benefits of robotic surgery. Robot-assisted surgery is also being explored for conversion surgery in cases where radical resection becomes feasible after multidisciplinary treatment and in polysurgery cases involving multiple prior laparotomies. However, establishing robust evidence for its efficacy in radical surgery for conversion and polysurgery cases remains a challenge. This narrative review discusses the advantages and limitations of robot-assisted surgery in such complex cases based on an analysis of the literature. Additionally, it examines the prospects of robotic-assisted surgery in polysurgery, metachronous remnant gastric cancer, and conversion surgery.
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.