Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39699804›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2024

Robotic vs laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with Billroth I and II reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Konstantinos Kossenas, Olga Moutzouri, Filippos Georgopoulos

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. [Robotic gastrectomy: Research progress and practical challenges].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Konstantinos KossenasDepartment of Basic and Clinical Sciences, University of Nicosia Medical School, 21 Ilia Papakyriakou, 2414 Engomi, P.O. Box 24005, 1700, Nicosia, Cyprus. kossenaswork@gmail.com.
Olga MoutzouriDepartment of Basic and Clinical Sciences, University of Nicosia Medical School, 21 Ilia Papakyriakou, 2414 Engomi, P.O. Box 24005, 1700, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Filippos GeorgopoulosHead of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Al Zahra Hospital, Dubai, UAE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) has been increasingly used for the treatment of gastric cancer, however, its comparative safety and efficacy against the laparoscopic approach (LDG), remains unclear, especially when accounting the reconstruction method as a confounder. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of RDG vs LDG In patIents with gastric cancer, undergoing Billroth I and II reconstruction. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched Pubmed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library, up to October 22nd, 2024. The primary outcomes analyzed were the blood loss, operative duration, and the number of harvested lymph nodes and the secondary outcomes included overall complications, time to oral intake, duration of hospitalization and time to first flatus. Random-effects models were used to calculate weighted mean differences (WMD) and Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and heterogeneity was assessed using the I

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastroenterostomyLaparoscopyOperative TimeRobotic Surgical ProceduresStomach NeoplasmsBlood Loss, SurgicalHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeGastric cancerLaparoscopic distal gastrectomyMinimally invasive surgeryRobotic distal gastrectomyStomach

Identifiers

PMID39699804

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.