본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.

메타분석 1/5 보강
Annals of surgical oncology 📖 저널 OA 22.2% 2021: 1/6 OA 2022: 4/14 OA 2023: 6/31 OA 2024: 24/70 OA 2025: 75/257 OA 2026: 95/514 OA 2021~2026 2025 Vol.32(1) p. 351-373
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 4/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
755 patients (20,894 in the RG group and 47,861 in the LG group).
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
Robotic
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
No significant differences were found between RG and LG in terms of resection margin distance, mortality, anastomotic leakage, or recurrence rates. [CONCLUSIONS] RG is a safe and effective surgical option for patients of GC, but further improvements in operative duration and costs are needed.

Du R, Wan Y, Shang Y, Lu G

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer (GC).

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value p < 0.001
  • p-value p = 0.004
  • OR 0.62
  • 연구 설계 meta-analysis

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Du R, Wan Y, et al. (2025). Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.. Annals of surgical oncology, 32(1), 351-373. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-16371-w
MLA Du R, et al.. "Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis.." Annals of surgical oncology, vol. 32, no. 1, 2025, pp. 351-373.
PMID 39419891 ↗

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer (GC).

[PATIENTS AND METHODS] A comprehensive literature search across PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science identified 86 eligible studies, including 68,755 patients (20,894 in the RG group and 47,861 in the LG group).

[RESULTS] The analysis revealed that RG was associated with superior outcomes in several areas: more lymph nodes were harvested, intraoperative blood loss was reduced, postoperative hospital stays were shorter, and the time to first flatus and oral intake was shortened (all p < 0.001). Additionally, RG resulted in lower incidences of conversion to open surgery (OR = 0.62, p = 0.004), reoperation (OR = 0.68, p = 0.010), overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.82, p < 0.001), severe complications (OR = 0.65, p < 0.001), and pancreatic complications (OR = 0.60, p = 0.004). However, RG had longer operative times and higher costs (both p < 0.001). No significant differences were found between RG and LG in terms of resection margin distance, mortality, anastomotic leakage, or recurrence rates.

[CONCLUSIONS] RG is a safe and effective surgical option for patients of GC, but further improvements in operative duration and costs are needed.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반