ArticleCureus2026
Robot-Assisted Retroperitoneal Tumor Resection: Evaluation of Its Safety, Feasibility, and Implementation in a Japanese Clinical Setting.
Article in Cureus, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Robot-assisted resection of retroperitoneal tumors has been increasingly reported worldwide; however, its clinical implementation in Japan remains limited and is not yet approved under the national health insurance system. We aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of this approach in a Japanese clinical setting. Methods We retrospectively reviewed seven consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumor resection at a high-volume cancer center between July 2024 and September 2025. Patient selection was based on tumor size, location, and absence of extensive vascular invasion. All procedures were performed by an experienced robotic surgeon. Perioperative outcomes, including operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, complications, and pathological results, were analyzed. Results Median tumor diameter was 35 mm (range, 15-81 mm), including three tumors ≥60 mm. All procedures were completed robotically without conversion. No intraoperative complications or transfusions occurred. All patients achieved R0 resection without tumor rupture. Median hospital stay was six days, with no major complications or readmissions. At the 17-month median follow-up, all patients were alive without recurrence. Conclusions These findings suggest that robot-assisted resection is a safe and feasible minimally invasive approach in selected patients and support further prospective evaluation and broader implementation in Japan.
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.