ArticleSurgery today2026
Robot-assisted versus open surgery for adult congenital biliary dilatation: a comparative study of the short- and long-term outcomes.
Article in Surgery today, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe clinical value of robot-assisted surgery (RAS) for adult congenital biliary dilatation (CBD), particularly regarding the long-term outcomes, remains unclear. This study compared the perioperative outcomes and late biliary complications between RAS and open surgery (OS).
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included adult patients who underwent complete excision of the extrahepatic bile duct with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy for CBD obstruction. The perioperative outcomes and late biliary complications were compared between the RAS and OS groups.
resultsA total of 60 patients were analyzed (RAS, n = 18; OS, n = 42). The operative time was comparable between the groups (RAS: 355 min vs. OS: 334 min; P = 0.675), whereas intraoperative blood loss was lower and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the RAS group (25 mL vs. 85 mL; P = 0.002; and 8 days vs. 18 days; P < 0.001, respectively). Major postoperative complications were comparable between the groups. During the follow-up, the incidence of late biliary complications, including anastomotic stricture and cholangitis, was similar between the RAS and OS groups. No cases of residual bile duct cancer were observed during the study period.
conclusionRAS was associated with a lower blood loss and shorter postoperative hospital stay, with comparable perioperative outcomes and late biliary complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42479183What 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.