ArticleBMC surgery2026
Laparoscopic approach to proximal gastric cancer using wristed ArtiSential™ instruments: a comparative study of 145 laparoscopic gastrectomies.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the short- and long-term results of ArtiSential™-operated patients with a historic group of laparoscopic-operated patients.
methodsA total of 145 patients were included (37 patients in the ArtiSential group and 108 patients in the Laparoscopic group).
resultsThere were significantly more conversions in the Laparoscopic group compared to ArtiSential™ group (15.7% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.043). The procedure duration was significantly shorter in the ArtiSential™ group (240 ± 49 min vs. 277 ± 58 min; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity and mortality between groups (19.4% in the Lap group vs. 10.8% in the ArtiSential™ group). Multivariate analysis identified intraoperative blood loss (Beta 0.335; 95%CI: 21.774-58.616; p < 0.0001), tumor location (Beta - 0.518; 95%CI: -49 - -25.939; p < 0.0001) and the reconstruction with wristed instruments (Beta - 0.312; 95%CI: -52.261- -16.613; p < 0.0001) as significant predictors for duration of the surgery, while wristed instruments (Beta 0.247; 95%CI: 3.296-13.599; p = 0.001) and the UICC stage (Beta 0.375; 95%CI: 3.205-7.517; p < 0.0001) were significant predictors for the number of extracted lymph nodes. Perioperative chemotherapy (OR 3.521; 95%CI: 1.572-7.883; p = 0.002) and the use of wristed instruments (OR 4.018; 95%CI: 1.441-11.205; p = 0.008) were significant predictors for a complete number 10 lymph node station dissection.
conclusionOur findings suggest that ArtiSential™ wristed instruments offer key benefits in the challenging proximal anastomosis, allowing safe operations on patients with proximal tumors without increasing morbidity or mortality risk.
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.