ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Robotic surgery for small bowel obstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic surgery (RS) has expanded across elective surgical disciplines, yet its role in emergency general surgery remains poorly defined. Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is one of the most common indications for emergency abdominal surgery, and while laparoscopic surgery (LS) has demonstrated advantages over open surgery (OS), in appropriately selected patients at experienced centers, no large-scale study has evaluated robotic outcomes for this condition, partly because dedicated robotic identification variables in national databases have only recently become available. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes across robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches for SBO using a nationally representative database.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using the ACS-NSQIP database (2022-2023). Patients undergoing surgery for adhesive SBO were identified by ICD-10 codes and classified by surgical approach. Demographics, comorbidities, 30-day complications, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and operative time (OT) were analyzed. In the unmatched cohort, multinomial logistic regression assessed factors associated with approach selection. Propensity score matching (PSM) in a 1:1:1 ratio was performed to compare outcomes across balanced groups.
resultsOf 22,177 SBO operations, 15,246 (68.7%) were open, 6224 (28.1%) laparoscopic, and 707 (3.2%) robotic. After PSM (n = 701 per group), RS achieved the shortest median LOS (2 vs 3 vs 6 days, p < 0.001) but had the longest OT (130 vs 76 vs 109 min, p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was comparable across groups (RS 0.9%, LS 0.7%, OS 1.6%; p = 0.241). Both minimally invasive approaches demonstrated significantly lower rates of organ space SSI, superficial SSI, wound dehiscence, and 30-day readmission compared to OS (all p < 0.001). ASA classification, ascites, disseminated cancer, and age were among the factors significantly associated with surgical approach.
conclusionIn this propensity score-matched national analysis, robotic surgery for SBO was associated with the shortest hospitalization and a safety profile comparable to laparoscopic surgery in selected patients. Both minimally invasive approaches demonstrated advantages over open surgery across multiple endpoints. These findings support the continued evaluation of robotic surgery as a feasible option for SBO at experienced centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42675297What 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.