ArticleCureus2026
Microporous Polysaccharide Hemosphere Absorbable Hemostat Combined With a Spray-Type Adhesion Barrier Enhances the Safety and Efficacy of Repeat Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience and Outcomes.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic repeat hepatectomy for recurrent liver tumors: a systematic review of contemporary evidence and technical strategies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The use of spray-type adhesion barrier (SAB) can reduce the adhesion formation after liver resection, and some types of absorbable hemostats are reported to have anti-adhesive properties. The safety of repeat hepatectomy remains unknown when microporous polysaccharide hemosphere (MPH) is used in combination with SAB during a previous hepatectomy. Methods This single-center retrospective study included a total of 47 consecutive cases that underwent robotic repeat hepatectomy (RRH) at our institution between September 2021 and October 2025. The included patients were divided into three groups: patients who underwent a previous hepatectomy without the use of SAB (non-SAB group, n=15), those with the previous use of SAB only (SAB group, n=21), and those with the previous use of both MPH and SAB (MPH+SAB group, n=11). The perioperative outcomes were compared between the groups. Results There were no differences between the groups in background characteristics, difficulty scores, intraoperative blood loss, console time, operative time, or the occurrence of postoperative complications. In the whole cohort, there was no conversion to open hepatectomy and no mortality. While no significant difference was observed between the groups for the duration of adhesiolysis prior to robotic intervention, there were significant differences between the non-SAB, SAB, and MPH+SAB groups in the adhesion severity score (7 vs 6 vs 3, p < 0.001) and the time for robotic adhesiolysis (97.4 min vs. 42.4 min vs. 32.6 min, p = 0.002). The post-hoc pairwise comparison showed that the adhesion severity was less severe in the MPH+SAB group than in the non-SAB group (p < 0.001) or SAB group (p = 0.026). Conclusions The combined use of MPH and SAB does not appear to correlate with a higher incidence of intraperitoneal abscess or bile leakage during RRH. Furthermore, their use in a prior hepatectomy may enhance the safety of subsequent RRH by reducing the adhesion severity around the liver. Their application may also help minimize the duration of robotic adhesiolysis surrounding the liver, especially around the previous liver cut surface. Thus, the combined use of MPH and SAB appears feasible and may not be associated with increased complications, but a larger prospective validation is warranted to produce more trustworthy recommendations.
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.