ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy in elderly gastric cancer patients: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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 versus laparoscopic surgery in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recovery-centered outcomes.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith Japan's aging population, the number of elderly patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery is increasing. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is reported to offer advantages in reducing postoperative complications compared to conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of RG as well as to figure out the clinical significance in elderly patients.
methodsThis is a retrospective single-center study to analyze clinical data of patients who underwent either LG or RG for gastric cancer using an inhouse database between January 2018 and December 2022.
resultsA total of 951 patients were included: 635 non-elderly (LG: 444, RG: 191) and 316 elderly (≥ 75 years; LG: 233, RG: 83). In both cohorts, RG was associated with longer operative time and slightly more blood loss than LG. Although not statistically significant, the incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) tended to be lower in the RG group in both the non-elderly (2.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.08) and elderly (3.6 vs. 6.0%, p = 0.57) cohorts. Multivariate analysis identified physical status and total/proximal gastrectomy (TG/PG) as independent risk factors for severe complications in elderly patients, while LG and TG/PG were significant predictors in non-elderly patients.
conclusionsRG appears to be a safe and feasible option for elderly gastric cancer patients, with comparable short-term outcomes to LG. In the elderly population, the occurrence of postoperative complications is more strongly influenced by physical status and procedural complexity than by surgical approach (RG or LG), emphasizing the need for individualized operative planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42321467What 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.