Robotic versus open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection: a risk-adjusted comparative study

BACKGROUND: Evidence directly comparing robotic and open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection remains limited. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between the two approaches in a high-volume hepatobiliary center. METHODS: We reviewed 1706 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy for intrahepatic lesions between January 2024 and December 2025. Among them, 232 patients met the criteria for IWATE expert-level resection, including 70 robotic and 162 open cases. The primary outcome was major complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III. One-to-one propensity score matching was used as the primary risk-adjustment method. Overlap weighting was performed as a sensitivity analysis, with an additional malignancy-restricted analysis. Exploratory subgroup analyses were conducted for major complications and textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS). RESULTS: Propensity score matching yielded 68 well-balanced pairs. In the matched cohort, robotic hepatectomy had longer operative time than open hepatectomy (median, 240.0 vs 205.5 min; P = 0.002), but lower estimated blood loss (100.0 vs 200.0 mL; P = 0.038) and shorter postoperative length of stay (6.0 vs 9.0 days; P < 0.001). Major complications were comparable between the robotic and open groups (13.2% vs 19.1%; P = 0.480). TOLS and severe liver-specific complications were also similar between groups. No significant between-group difference was observed in 90-day mortality. Findings from the overlap-weighted and malignancy-restricted analyses were directionally consistent with the primary analysis. In exploratory subgroup analyses, no significant interaction was observed across most prespecified subgroups, whereas a significant interaction with cirrhosis was detected for both major complications and TOLS. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic hepatectomy was associated with reduced blood loss and shorter postoperative stay without increased major morbidity or mortality in selected patients undergoing IWATE expert-level liver resection at an experienced center. These findings support the selective application of robotic hepatectomy in technically demanding liver resections.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Surgical Endoscopy
Published
2026-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-13310-6
Primary Topic
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Robotic versus open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection: a risk-adjusted comparative study

Awang Danzeng, Bin‐hao Zhang, Gang Liu, Bixiang Zhang et al.
Surgical Endoscopy
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
article

Robotic versus open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection: a risk-adjusted comparative study

Awang Danzeng, Bin‐hao Zhang, Gang Liu, Bixiang Zhang, Qunpei Danzeng, Xin Luo, Ling Guo, Ya-qi Shen, Xue-mei Hu, Xue-wei Jiang, Jing Chen
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence directly comparing robotic and open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection remains limited. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between the two approaches in a high-volume hepatobiliary center. METHODS: We reviewed 1706 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy for intrahepatic lesions between January 2024 and December 2025. Among them, 232 patients met the criteria for IWATE expert-level resection, including 70 robotic and 162 open cases. The primary outcome was major complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III. One-to-one propensity score matching was used as the primary risk-adjustment method. Overlap weighting was performed as a sensitivity analysis, with an additional malignancy-restricted analysis. Exploratory subgroup analyses were conducted for major complications and textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS). RESULTS: Propensity score matching yielded 68 well-balanced pairs. In the matched cohort, robotic hepatectomy had longer operative time than open hepatectomy (median, 240.0 vs 205.5 min; P = 0.002), but lower estimated blood loss (100.0 vs 200.0 mL; P = 0.038) and shorter postoperative length of stay (6.0 vs 9.0 days; P < 0.001). Major complications were comparable between the robotic and open groups (13.2% vs 19.1%; P = 0.480). TOLS and severe liver-specific complications were also similar between groups. No significant between-group difference was observed in 90-day mortality. Findings from the overlap-weighted and malignancy-restricted analyses were directionally consistent with the primary analysis. In exploratory subgroup analyses, no significant interaction was observed across most prespecified subgroups, whereas a significant interaction with cirrhosis was detected for both major complications and TOLS. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic hepatectomy was associated with reduced blood loss and shorter postoperative stay without increased major morbidity or mortality in selected patients undergoing IWATE expert-level liver resection at an experienced center. These findings support the selective application of robotic hepatectomy in technically demanding liver resections.

Surgical Endoscopy
Jiaozuo University (CN), Tongji Hospital (CN), Union Hospital (CN), Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.