Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42487051›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026

Live-streaming robotic liver resection for surgical education: is it safe? a multicenter matched cohort analysis.

Alessia Fassari, Benedetto Ielpo, Vito de Blasi, Francesca Marcucci, Alexandru Amariutei, Antonio Iannelli, Edoardo Rosso

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alessia FassariCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Benedetto IelpoDepartment of Surgery, Hepato‑Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain.
Vito de BlasiDepartment of General Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg.
Francesca MarcucciInstitut de Chirurgie Foie et Pancréas, Pôle Santé Sud, rue de Gutteloup, Le Mans, 72100, France.
Alexandru AmariuteiInstitut de Chirurgie Foie et Pancréas, Pôle Santé Sud, rue de Gutteloup, Le Mans, 72100, France.
Antonio IannelliInstitut de Biologie Valrose, Nice, 06000, France.
Edoardo RossoInstitut de Chirurgie Foie et Pancréas, Pôle Santé Sud, rue de Gutteloup, Le Mans, 72100, France. edoardo_rosso@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6948-155X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Live-streaming surgery is increasingly used as an educational tool in the surgical community. The safety of live-streamed robotic liver resection has not been formally evaluated. We assessed perioperative outcomes of robotic live-streaming liver resections compared with not-live streaming liver resections. This multicenter retrospective matched cohort study reviewed 311 liver resections performed between October 2024 and December 2025 at three European HPB centers. Forty-two consecutive patients who underwent robotic live-streaming liver resection (L-SS group) were matched 1:1 to patients who underwent not-live liver resection (not-L-SS group) during the same period, generating a matched cohort of 84 patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III). Secondary endpoints included conversion to open surgery, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative bile leak, posthepatectomy liver failure, length of hospital stay, R1 resection rate, and 90-day mortality. Intraoperative variables, including use and duration of the Pringle maneuver, were also recorded. After matching on ASA score, presence of cirrhosis, tumour laterality, lesion contact with the cavo-caval confluence, and surgical approach, baseline characteristics showed reduced imbalance between groups, although the L-SS group retained significantly larger tumours and a higher proportion of technically advanced resections. The primary endpoint, severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III), was similar between groups (4.8% vs. 7.1%, p = 1.000), as were conversion rate, transfusion rate, bile leak, posthepatectomy liver failure, readmission, reintervention and 90-day mortality. The L-SS group had a significantly higher frequency (83.3% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.001) and longer duration (median 45 vs. 25 min, p = 0.004) of the Pringle maneuver, a shorter hospital stay (7 vs. 10.5 days, p = 0.001), and a lower rate of any-grade 30-day complications (7.3% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.005). These findings were unchanged after excluding patients with a Pringle maneuver duration exceeding 60 min (sensitivity analysis). In this multicenter matched cohort study, robotic live-streaming liver resection did not detect an increase in severe postoperative complications in highly selected patients, with severe complication rates comparable to non-streamed resections. The higher Pringle maneuver use likely reflects a didactic intraoperative strategy rather than increased risk. Prospective studies should evaluate educational efficacy and trainee skill acquisition.

Indexed as

HepatectomyLiver NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesLive-streaming surgeryMatched cohort studyPringle maneuverRobotic liver resectionSurgical educationTelementoring

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.