SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic surgery for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a systematic review.
Synthesis 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic surgery is used for selected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs), particularly when location makes conventional wedge resection difficult. We synthesised technical, perioperative, pathological, functional and oncological outcomes. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 14 August 2026. Primary reports with at least three eligible robotic gastric-GIST patients were included. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and completed design-specific JBI appraisal. Because outcome definitions, denominators and reporting were heterogeneous, findings were synthesised narratively in accordance with SWiM guidance rather than pooled. Twenty-three studies, including six comparative cohorts, were included. Institutional robotic cohorts contained 3-45 eligible patients; one national registry included 1,567 robotic cases. Tumour size ranged from 2.68 ± 1.55 to 7.9 ± 1.8 cm among studies reporting means. Most institutional reports described R0 resection in all eligible patients; exceptions were 23/24 and 24/25, while the registry reported 1,425/1,567 R0 resections. Grade III morbidity occurred in 2/25 patients in one function-preserving series. Registry 30- and 90-day mortality after robotic resection were 0.5% and 0.8%, respectively. Comparative studies did not demonstrate superior postoperative or oncological outcomes with robotic surgery. Robotic gastric-GIST resection appears feasible in selected patients and may facilitate organ-preserving surgery at anatomically challenging sites. Current observational evidence does not establish comparative functional, oncological or economic superiority.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42730783What 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.