ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy with splenic hilar lymph node dissection: short-term outcomes from a propensity score-matched 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spleen-preserving dissection of the No. 10 (splenic hilar) nodal station is technically demanding, given the narrow working space bordered by terminal splenic vessels and the pancreatic tail. This study aimed to compare short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic No. 10 dissection. We retrospectively compared 113 patients undergoing gastrectomy with No. 10 dissection (laparoscopic, n = 69; robotic, n = 44) at a single center (November 2008-March 2026). Propensity scores (age, sex, BMI, preoperative chemotherapy, clinical T4 status, nodal positivity) were used for 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching (0.2-SD logit caliper), yielding 35 pairs; paired outcomes were compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar tests. In the matched cohort, robotic surgery had less blood loss (0 [IQR 0-20] vs. 30 [5-150] mL; P < 0.001), lower day-1 drain amylase (248 [161-481] vs. 593 [427-1113] IU/L; P = 0.001), and higher No. 10 nodal yield (1 [1-2] vs. 1 [1-1]; P = 0.009), with a trend toward longer operative time (404 [367-438] vs. 372 [333-402] min; P = 0.050). Total nodal yield, morbidity (overall 17.1% vs. 11.4%, P = 0.683; severe 14.3% vs. 11.4%, P = 1.000), and hospital stay (14 vs. 13 days; P = 0.339) did not differ; neither arm had splenic hilar fistula or No. 10 metastasis. Robotic gastrectomy was associated with less blood loss, lower pancreatic enzyme elevation, and higher No. 10 nodal yield than laparoscopy, without added morbidity or longer stay. Prospective, multicenter studies are needed to confirm and clarify the oncological rationale for routine No. 10 dissection.Trial registration: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000032895).
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.