ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Comparative analysis of robotic assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a retrospective cohort 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparing perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted (RAS) and laparoscopic (LAP) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Premier Healthcare Database, from 2020 to 2023. The study included adult patients with Body Mass Index 30 or higher who underwent elective inpatient RYGB surgery via RAS or LAP. RAS and LAP cohorts were matched through propensity scoring. Regression models with standard errors clustered by matched pair were used to estimate associations between surgical approach and perioperative outcomes. After matching, RAS-RYGB was associated with lower odds of conversion to open surgery (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32-0.73), ICU admission (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73), blood transfusion (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.95) compared with LAP-RYGB. RAS-RYGB was also associated with slightly lower odds of being in a higher length-of-stay category (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81-0.89) and have 30-day all-cause reencounters (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.91). Operating room time was longer with RAS-RYGB (mean difference, 17.5 min; 95% CI, 16.1-18.9), and bowel obstruction was more frequent (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.54). Other perioperative complications were similar between groups. RAS-RYGB was associated with lower conversion to open surgery, blood transfusion, ICU admissions, modest shift towards shorter length of stay and post-operative visits than LAP-RYGB, but with higher bowel obstruction and longer operating time.
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.