ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Comparison of laparoscopic and robotic liver surgery: a German real-world analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic operations are becoming increasingly important in minimally invasive liver surgery. Although safety and efficiency have already been demonstrated, real-world data regarding robotic experiences compared to laparoscopic procedures remain limited.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic resection for malignant or benign liver tumors between January 2020 and June 2024 at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf.
resultsA total of 308 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 133 patients underwent robotic resection with the DaVinci®-Xi system, while 175 patients were operated laparoscopically. In the robotic cohort, major resections were performed more frequently (27 [20.3%] vs. 14 [8.0%]; p = 0.002). Moreover, the rate of patients with liver cirrhosis was higher (34.6% vs. 20%; p = 0.004), and more patients were classified as ASA 3-4 (61.7% vs. 48.6%; p = 0.022). Additionally, a greater number of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary neoplasia underwent robotic resection (54.0% vs. 34.2%; p = 0.004). Operation time was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (132 min vs. 187 min; p = 0.004). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for conversion rate, intraoperative blood loss, overall complication rate, and complications classified as
conclusionIn a real-world setting, we retrospectively observed a selection tendency favoring the robotic approach for multimorbid patients, particularly those with liver cirrhosis and primary malignant liver tumors with higher complexity, highlighting the evolving role of robotic surgery in managing complex liver resections.
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.