Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41136579›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026

Robotic-assisted surgery for tumors in the anterior parotid and midcheek regions: a comparative study with conventional approaches.

Joo Hyun Kim, Eun Chang Choi

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Robotic-assisted parotidectomy as a remote-access alternative to conventional open surgery: a single-center comparative experience.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
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

2 authors.

Joo Hyun KimDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea. hilguy@yuhs.ac.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8533-9649
Eun Chang ChoiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo compare robotic-assisted and conventional surgical approaches for anterior parotid and midcheek tumors regarding surgical outcomes, complications, cosmetic results, and oncologic safety.

methodsBetween March 2020 and March 2024, a total of 47 patients who underwent surgery for anterior parotid or midcheek tumors at Yongin Severance hospital were included in the study. Among them, 22 underwent robotic-assisted surgery and 25 underwent conventional surgery. Clinical data including demographics, tumor characteristics, operative outcomes, complications, cosmetic satisfaction, and oncologic outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

resultsThe robotic group demonstrated significantly lower mean intraoperative blood loss (24.9 ± 12.6 mL vs. 32.7 ± 17.2 mL; p = 0.04) and longer mean operative time (93.6 ± 8.9 min vs. 73.2 ± 7.2 min; p = 0.01). No facial nerve palsy occurred in the robotic group, compared to two cases in the conventional group. Cosmetic satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the robotic group (mean VAS 1.4 vs. 5.09; p < 0.001). Postoperative drainage volumes (57.3 ± 10.5 mL vs. 62.5 ± 12.4 mL; p = 0.45) and length of hospital stay (3.7 ± 0.2 vs. 4.2 ± 0.7 days; p = 0.09) did not differ significantly between groups. At a mean follow-up of 24.6 months, no tumor recurrences were observed in either group.

conclusionsIn this study, robotic-assisted surgery for anterior parotid and midcheek tumors was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss and favorable cosmetic outcomes, with a possible advantage in facial nerve preservation, while maintaining oncologic feasibility compared to conventional approaches.

Indexed as

CheekFacial NeoplasmsParotid NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedBlood Loss, SurgicalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCosmetic resultsMidcheek tumorsMinimally invasive surgeryParotidectomyRobotic surgerySurgical outcomes

Identifiers

PMID41136579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.