ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Towards standardized assessment of surgical difficulty in robotic hepatobiliary surgery: a comparative validation study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of robotic platforms in hepatobiliary surgery has expanded the range of procedures amenable to a minimally invasive approach. Surgical difficulty assessment is essential for optimal patient selection, particularly during the surgeon's learning curve. Although several difficulty scoring systems (DSS) have been proposed, most have been developed for laparoscopic liver surgery. Therefore, their predictive performance in robotic series remains uncertain. Patients undergoing robotic liver resection for various indications were identified from a prospectively-maintained database. The Tampa, IWATE, Halls, Hasegawa, and Kawaguchi DSS were calculated based on variables available at the time of surgery. The predictive accuracy of the five DSS when assessing intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using the ROC-AUC. Among 187 patients, unplanned conversion occurred in 4.3% (n = 8), severe morbidity in 14.4% (n = 27) and 90-day mortality in 3.2% (n = 6). Textbook Outcome in Liver Laparoscopic Surgery (TOLLS) was achieved in 66.8% (n = 125). The categorization of patients into surgical difficulty categories varied drastically among the DSSs. The Tampa DSS demonstrated the highest discriminatory ability for predicting unplanned conversion (AUC = 0.735), severe complication (AUC = 0.743), 90-day mortality (AUC = 0.722), and TOLLS achievement (AUC = 0.702) (Fig. 1). In this robotic series, the Tampa DSS showed superior performance in predicting postoperative outcomes. Standardized assessment of surgical complexity is crucial for accurate patient selection, reliable benchmarking, and tailored implementation of learning curves.
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.