Observational studySurgical endoscopy2026
Robotic-assisted surgery improves short-term outcomes of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a referral-center cohort study.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and direct pairwise meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Transitioning to the robotic era for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: initial implementation and outcomes in a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical management of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) is one of the most challenging procedures within hepatobiliary surgery. Robotic platform, with its intrinsic advantages, is emerging as a promising tool for these complex procedures. The aim of the study was to compare perioperative outcomes of robotic and open resections of pCCA.
methodsRetrospective, single-referral center, observational study comparing preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes between the first 10 consecutive robotic resections and the last 20 consecutive open resections of histologically confirmed pCCA. All cases were potentially candidates for both approaches. Exclusion criteria were palliative resections, unresectable/metastatic disease, associated vascular resections, concomitant malignancies or prior major hepatectomy.
resultsBaseline characteristics were similar between the open and robotic groups, with a median age of 69 years, a predominance of male (73%) and a homogeneous representation of Bismuth type (I-23%; II-13%; IIIa-13%; IIIb-27%; IV-23%). The only preoperative difference was the use of bilateral biliary drains exclusively in the open group (p = 0.029). Intraoperatively, robotic approach required less blood transfusions (p = 0.038) and allowed more extended lymphadenectomies (p = 0.001), with a consequently higher number of retrieved nodes (median 9 [6-16] vs. 4 [2-8], p = 0.022), at cost of longer operative time (660 vs 345 min, p < 0.001). Postoperative complications, 90-days mortality rates and hospital stay were comparable (p = 0.175, p > 0.99 and p = 0.055).
conclusionsRobotic-assisted resection for pCCA appears to be a feasible and safe approach in selected patients and experienced hands, offering potential advantages over open surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41361513What 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.