SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Oncologic, functional, and economic outcomes of transoral robotic surgery for HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pathology and treatment strategies.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has increased substantially. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) provides detailed pathological assessment that may support risk-adapted treatment strategies; however, integrated evidence on oncologic, functional, and economic outcomes remains limited. To systematically evaluate oncologic, functional, and economic outcomes of TORS-based treatment strategies in patients with HPV-positive OPSCC. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Wiley Online Library, MDPI, Cureus, and medRxiv were searched for studies published between 2019 and 2025. Pre-specified subgroup meta-analyses (randomized/clinical trial versus observational studies, and primary versus salvage settings) were performed using random-effects models for overall survival (OS), postoperative bleeding, tracheostomy rate, and long-term gastrostomy dependence. Twenty-two studies (20 clinical and 2 economic) were included, with 14 contributing to quantitative synthesis. The pooled 2-year OS was 94% (95% CI: 0.90-0.98), the 3-year OS was 96% (95% CI: 0.92-0.99), and the 5-year OS was 92% (95% CI: 0.90-0.95). In the salvage setting, the pooled 2-year OS was 76% (95% CI: 0.71-0.80), with no observed statistical heterogeneity, although based on a limited number of studies. Subgroup analyses indicated higher survival estimates in randomized/clinical trial settings compared with observational cohorts. Functional outcomes were generally favorable, with pooled postoperative hemorrhage of 7% (95% CI: 0.04-0.11), tracheostomy rate of 9% (95% CI: 0.03-0.14), and long-term gastrostomy dependence of 2% (95% CI: 0.00-0.03).Across included studies, TORS provided detailed pathological information that may support risk stratification and inform adjuvant treatment decisions; however, the extent of treatment de-escalation varied across studies. TORS appears to be an effective treatment option in selected patients with HPV-positive OPSCC, with generally favorable oncologic and functional outcomes. However, interpretation of these findings is limited by heterogeneity in study design and patient populations. Further prospective studies are required to clarify its role in treatment de-escalation and long-term outcomes.Registration: PROSPERO (CRD420251240194).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42162526What 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.