SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy provides better short-term outcomes as compared to its laparoscopic counterpart: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Precision Medicine and Artificial Intelligence in Next-Generation Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Applications, Therapeutic Outcomes, and Implementation Strategies.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Pooled it
- Pancreatic head clockwise devascularization technique during robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy to minimize intraoperative bleeding.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of open versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective Markov model analysis from China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- External Validation of the Auditing Fistula Risk Score for Pancreatoduodenectomy.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy is becoming more and more popular among surgeons, but whether robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is superior to laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. The study aims to assess the available literature and compare the perioperative outcomes of RPD and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science databases (October 2024). Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: The 29 studies that met inclusion criteria included 15137 PDs, out of which 8935 were LPD and 6202 were RPD. Compared with LPD, RPD has lower overall complications (RR, 0.87), conversion rates (RR, 0.47) and blood transfusion rates (RR, 0.56), shorter length of stay (MD, -0.80 days), and higher number of harvested lymph nodes (MD, 1.77). There were no significant differences observed in 90-day mortality (RR, 0.92), major complications (RR, 1.00), operative time (MD, 3.93 mins), blood loss (MD, -22.50 mL), reoperation (RR, 0.96), bile leak (RR, 0.87), postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR, 1.00), delayed gastric emptying (RR, 1.19), and R0 resection (RR, 0.99) between the groups. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted surgery for PD is safe and feasible. Compared to LPD, it offers better short-term outcomes.
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.