ReviewCancers2025
Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal Malignancies-A Review of How Far Have We Come in Pancreatic, Gastric, Liver, and Colorectal Cancer Surgery.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The global surgical workforce crisis: narrative review of the role of surgical educator development and technological innovations.Surgery today · 2026Review
- Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted gastrointestinal surgery during early program implementation: a retrospective single-center study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic-assisted surgery offers technological advantages such as three-dimensional visualization and improved dexterity, yet its clinical adoption in gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies is supported by evidence of varying quality, consisting mainly of retrospective studies. This review provides a structured summary of the current evidence for robotic surgery in pancreatic, gastric, liver, and colorectal cancers.
methodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted to assess and summarize the perioperative, long-term, and oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery compared to laparoscopic and open approaches for the aforementioned GI malignancies.
resultsThe application of the robotic platform is most advanced in colorectal surgery. High-quality evidence for rectal cancer demonstrates improved quality of mesorectal specimens, better preservation of urinary and sexual function, and lower local recurrence rates. Across all reviewed GI malignancies, robotic surgery consistently shows advantages in lower conversion-to-open rates, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stays, though it is associated with longer operative times and higher costs. The evidence for pancreatic and liver surgery is less mature due to the complexity of these procedures. Data for gastric surgery suggests improved lymph node retrieval and, in one long-term study, better disease-free survival.
conclusionsThe highest-quality evidence supports the robotic approach for rectal cancer, showing clear functional and oncological benefits. While several perioperative advantages are consistently reported across all GI sites, robust data demonstrating superior long-term survival are still limited for most procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.