Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41340680›Full record

ReviewKardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery2025

Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Danilo Coco, Silvana Leanza

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery, 2025. 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. Review
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.

Danilo CocoDepartment of General Surgery, Giglio Hospital Foundation, Cefalù, Italy.
Silvana LeanzaDepartment of General Surgery, Giglio Hospital Foundation, Cefalù, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Esophagectomy is a complex surgical procedure primarily used for the treatment of esophageal malignancies and other esophageal disorders. In recent years, minimally invasive techniques, such as laparoscopic and robotic-assisted esophagectomy, have gained popularity due to their potential to reduce postoperative morbidity and enhance recovery. However, the comparative effectiveness, safety, and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic esophagectomy remain unclear. Aim: This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic esophagectomy, with a focus on operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, lymph node yield, R0 resection rate, and oncological outcomes. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic esophagectomy were included. The primary outcomes were operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, lymph node yield, R0 resection rate, and long-term oncological outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata version 16.0, with a Results: A total of 24 studies (6 RCTs and 18 observational studies) involving 6,972 patients (3,433 robotic and 3,539 laparoscopic esophagectomy cases) were included. Robotic esophagectomy was associated with a longer operative time (mean difference [MD] = 55.52 minutes, 95% CI: 27.55 to 83.49, Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrates that robotic esophagectomy, despite longer operative times, offers advantages in terms of reduced blood loss, higher lymph node yield, and improved R0 resection rates compared to laparoscopic esophagectomy. Both techniques exhibit comparable postoperative complication rates, length of hospital stay, and long-term oncological outcomes. The choice between laparoscopic and robotic esophagectomy should be guided by surgeon expertise, patient-specific factors, and institutional resources.

Indexed as

esophageal canceresophagectomylaparoscopiclymph node yieldmeta-analysisminimally invasive surgerypostoperative outcomesR0 resectionrobotic

Identifiers

PMID41340680
PMCPMC12670222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.