ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
Operative safety and oncologic outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for advanced middle-upper gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) has been proposed as a promising alternative to laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for advanced middle-upper gastric cancer (AMUGC) due to its potential to overcome anatomical challenges. However, the comparative evidence regarding both safety and long-term oncologic efficacy remains limited. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 1099 patients with AMUGC who underwent RTG/LTG at eight high-volume centers in China between 2015 and 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM = 1:1) was used to balance clinicopathological characteristics between the two groups. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS); secondary outcomes included 3-year overall survival (OS), 3-year cumulative incidence of recurrence (CIR), recurrence patterns, and operative outcomes. Results: In the PSM cohort, 229 patients were included in each group. RTG demonstrated lower overall postoperative complications (16.2% vs. 27.1%, Conclusions: For AMUGC patients not receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, RTG demonstrated potential advantages in certain operative outcomes and non-inferior 3-year oncological outcomes compared with LTG. Prospective trials are needed to validate these findings.
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.