ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic-assisted and open resection for hepatic caudate lobe hemangioma: a single-center retrospective study.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHepatic caudate lobe hemangiomas present unique surgical challenges due to the segment's deep location amidst critical vasculature (IVC, portal vein, hepatic veins). The literature on hepatic caudate lobe hemangiomas remains limited, resulting in a lack of comprehensive understanding and standardized treatment protocols for this condition. By comparing the surgical and perioperative outcomes of robotic versus open complete isolated caudate lobectomy for hemangiomas, this study aims to advance our understanding and management of this disease.
methodsThis single-center study included 83 patients who underwent complete isolated caudate lobe hemangioma resection. Patients were allocated to two groups: the robotic liver resection group (RLR, n = 33) and the open liver resection group (OLR, n = 50). Demographic characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared between the two cohorts. Additionally, we explored the risk factors for intraoperative bleeding and conducted a subgroup analysis of patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m
resultsRLR demonstrated superior outcomes vs OLR: shorter median operative time (median 105.0 vs. 192.5 min, p < 0.001), reduced blood loss (50 vs 300 mL; p < 0.001), lower transfusion rates (3.0% vs 20.0%; p < 0.05), abbreviated hospital stay (9 vs 16 days; p < 0.001), and faster recovery (postoperative stay: 5 vs 8 days; p < 0.001). Univariate analysis revealed that increased blood loss was significantly associated with surgical approach, platelet count, POD (postoperative days), operation time, and ALT level. Multivariate analysis confirmed that longer operation time was an independent predictor of increased intraoperative blood loss. High-BMI RLR patients had significantly reduced operative time (105.0 vs 231.0 min; p = 0.001), blood loss (30.0 vs 400.0 mL; p < 0.001).
conclusionRobotic isolated caudate lobectomy for hemangioma is feasible and safe, offering significant perioperative advantages over open surgery-including reduced blood loss, shorter hospitalization, and accelerated recovery-even in high-BMI patients. Robotic resection represents a viable surgical option for selected patients with hepatic caudate lobe hemangiomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41634448What 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.