ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Mid-term outcomes of robotic assisted versus conventional sternotomy for mitral valve replacement: a nationwide propensity-weighted analysis using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database.
Article 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standardized totally endoscopic non-robotic mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation: early single-center outcomes in 84 patients.Global cardiology science & practice · 2026Article
- Short- and Mid-Term Outcomes of Robotic Mitral Valve Repair for Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation in Octogenarians.Circulation reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare survival, complications, and healthcare costs between robotic-assisted and conventional sternotomy mitral valve replacement, using a nationwide population-based dataset from Taiwan.
methodsPatients who underwent isolated surgical MVR between 2016 and 2021 were identified from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. A total of 5,736 patients met inclusion criteria: 5,547 underwent conventional sternotomy MVR (CSMVR), and 113 received robot-assisted MVR (RAMVR). To reduce confounding, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied using age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index as covariates, yielding a weighted cohort of 5,660 CSMVR and 5,640 RAMVR cases for outcome analysis.
resultsAfter IPTW adjustment, RAMVR was associated with significantly better survival (hazard ratio: 0.37; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.41; p < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (16.5 vs. 22.7 days, p < 0.01), and shorter intensive care unit stay (4.4 vs. 9.1 days, p < 0.01). RAMVR patients also had lower rates of dialysis and stroke. One-year post-discharge medical costs were significantly lower in the RAMVR group (USD 1,640 vs. 4,003, p < 0.01). Although inpatient costs appeared lower for RAMVR, this reflects the exclusion of patient-borne expenses for robotic equipment not reimbursed by insurance.
conclusionIn this national population-based analysis, RAMVR was associated with better mid-term survival, shorter hospital stays, and reduced medical costs compared with conventional sternotomy. These findings support the use of robotic-assisted surgery as a safe and effective alternative in selected patients undergoing mitral valve replacement.
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.