Observational studySurgical endoscopy2026
Propensity score-matched multicentric observational cohort study comparing robotic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Observational study 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith increasing penetration of robotic surgery, robotic cholecystectomies are becoming more popular. There are several benefits which may be possible with the use of robotic platforms for cholecystectomy. These are reduced pain, lesser blood loss, and the potential for artificial intelligence integration. We evaluated the use of RC using three different robotic platforms at four tertiary care hospitals against the standard LC for preset objectives. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies till now which have compared RC using different robotic platforms against LC.
methodsThis study is a prospective, multicentric, observational cohort study comparing data of all cholecystectomies performed at four tertiary care teaching hospitals between August 2025 and November 2025. The patients decided which procedure they would like to undergo, depending on their preference, making an informed decision. The difficulty of the procedure or other disease/patient related factors did not dictate the choice of procedure for a given patient. Data regarding patient demographics, comorbidities, per-operative details, and postoperative pain and complications were captured.
resultsPropensity score matching was performed and the following variables were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with the variable 'Surgery': age group, operative time (Minutes), Prince Henry Pain Score (4 Hours), Prince Henry Pain Score (POD 1), Prince Henry Pain Score (POD 7), analgesia requirement (POD 7), most painful port (4 Hours), most painful port (POD 1), Most Painful Port (POD 7), and return to work (days).
conclusionRobotic cholecystectomy is as safe as LC. Propensity score-matched data show that RC is associated with longer operative times, less postoperative pain and analgesia requirements, and earlier return to work when compared to LC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42115368What 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.