SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic hepatectomy has recently been developed as an alternative to laparoscopic and open approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. However, comparative studies are lacking. We conducted a PRISMA-NMA–compliant systematic review (PROSPERO CRD420251265604) of databases, comparing robot-assisted hepatectomy with laparoscopic/open resection for adult HCC. We used ROBINS-I to assess bias and GRADE to assess evidence. Frequentist random-effects NMA estimated OR/MD, with consistency, ranking, and CINeMA certainty. A total of 23 studies (9,666 patients) were included. Overall complications (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35–0.77) and major complications (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28–0.67) were significantly less frequent after robotic hepatectomy than open surgery. Robotic surgery was associated with less blood loss (MD − 144.6 mL) and shorter hospital stay (MD − 3.0 days). The conversion rate was lower during robotic than laparoscopic surgery (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24–0.75). Robotic hepatectomy ranked first in 8 of 11 outcomes. Subgroup analysis stratified by extent of hepatectomy showed that the robotic advantage was most pronounced for major resections, with a 66% reduction in major complications compared with open surgery (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14–0.84, p = 0.019). This network meta-analysis, based entirely on retrospective observational data, suggests that robotic hepatectomy is associated with favorable perioperative outcomes compared with open surgery for HCC, including lower complication rates, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, while maintaining comparable oncological results. Robotic surgery was also associated with a lower conversion rate than laparoscopy. Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested a possible trend toward amplified benefits in major hepatic resections; however, this is based on limited data. These results must be interpreted with caution, given the entirely observational evidence base and potential for residual confounding. Robotic hepatectomy may be considered a viable surgical option for HCC when institutional resources and expertise permit.
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.