ArticleCancers2026
Balancing Surgical Innovation with Indications: A Multicenter Retrospective Comparison of Reduced-Port Distal Gastrectomy Using da Vinci SP Versus Multi-Port Robotic Platforms from the KLASS-13 Cohort.
Article in Cancers, 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
backgroundThe da Vinci single-port reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy (spRRDG) approach shows promise in enhancing surgical recovery while maintaining oncologic safety, but robust multicenter comparative data across diverse robotic platforms are lacking. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between spRRDG and conventional RRDG (cRRDG) using Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study-13 data.
methodsClinicopathologic variables and perioperative outcomes concerning 820 patients who underwent curative RRDG with D1+ or D2 lymph node dissection (LND) (da Vinci spRRDG,
resultsspRRDG involved a longer operative time than cRRDG (227.06 ± 6.19 vs. 183.58 ± 2.18 min,
conclusionspRRDG exhibited lower rLNs than cRRDG but remained within an oncologically acceptable range. Comparable complication rates and significantly improved ERAS outcomes suggest spRRDG is safe and feasible; however, its clinical application should remain limited to early gastric cancer until robust evidence from prospective studies emerges.
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.