SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2025
Comparison of the perioperative outcomes of robotic vs. open distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis of propensity-score-matched studies.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Configurational Setup for Fully Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy with Splenectomy Using Hugo™ RAS and Ligasure™ RAS Maryland: First Case Report (With Video).Journal of clinical medicine · 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
Objective: Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) is considered to offer certain advantages over traditional open distal pancreatectomy (ODP); however, high-quality evidence remains limited. This meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between RDP and ODP using data from propensity-score-matched studies. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing RDP and ODP. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: Seven studies with 1,526 patients were included (RDP group: 722 patients; ODP group: 804 patients). Compared with ODP, RDP was associated with a shorter hospital stay (MD -3.11 days; 95% CI, -4.45, -1.77), reduced blood loss (MD -163.38 mL; 95% CI, -212.08, -114.68), higher spleen preservation rates (OR 2.36, 95% CI, 1.06, 5.24) and lower surgical site infection (SSI) rates (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.29, 0.76). No significant differences were found in 90-day mortality, overall morbidity, major complications, operative time, reoperation rates, postoperative pancreatic fistula, number of harvested lymph nodes, and R0 resection rates. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that RDP may have potential advantages over ODP, including reduced blood loss, shorter hospitalization, higher spleen preservation, and lower SSI rates. These potential benefits warrant confirmation in future randomized controlled trials. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251031280, PROSPERO CRD420251031280.
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.