ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Early (≤ 1 year) anastomotic complications after laparoscopic and robotic hepaticojejunostomy: initial experience from a single center.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPresently, experience with laparoscopic and robotic bilio-enteric anastomosis (BEA) has been increasing world-wide although widespread adoption remains limited. In this study, we report our initial experience with both these modalities.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional review of a single center prospective database of 130 consecutive laparoscopically and robotically constructed BEAs in hepatopancreatobiliary surgeries performed between 2013 and 2022 was conducted. A propensity-scored match analysis comparing results between both groups was performed.
resultsThere were 55 patients in the laparoscopic cohort and 75 patients in the robotic cohort. There were no significant differences in the demographic data between both groups. Operative time was longer in the robotic group, but with less blood loss. There were no differences between the groups with regards to length of stay, number and grade of complications, reoperation and mortality rates. After propensity-score matching, there remained statistically significant differences in median operative time (robotic 650 min, 550-720 min; laparoscopic 550 min, 485-590 min) and median blood loss (robotic 200mls, 100-300; laparoscopic 300mls, 200-500mls). There remained no differences between the groups with regards to length of stay, number and grade of complications, reoperation and mortality rates between both groups after propensity-score matching. The overall biliary anastomotic leak rate was 4.6% (6/130). The anastomotic leak rate for L-HJ was 9.1% (5/55) versus 1.3% (1/75) for R-HJ, P = 0.08).
conclusionLaparoscopic and robotically constructed bilio-enteric anastomosis can be adopted safely with a low anastomotic complication rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41507548What 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.