Robotic liver surgery for metastatic disease: A review of safety, feasibility, and outcomes

Table 4 Oncological outcomes

Ref.	R0 resection rate	1-year OS	3-year OS	5-year OS	Key oncological findings
Safiejko et al[6]	NR	81.8% (RLR) vs 91.8% (LLR)	47.7% (RLR) vs 65.9% (LLR)	NR	Trend favoring LLR (NS)
Machairas et al[7]	100% (29/29)	NR	NR	75.2% (single study)	All R0 resections
Mkabaah et al[9]
RLR	82.1% (202/246)	100% (12/12)	41.7% (5/12)	NR	No significant differences between approaches
LLR	84.6% (2501/2957)	93.0% (213/229)	69.4% (159/229)	53.1% (191/360)
OLR	87.7% (2277/2597)	96.4% (321/333)	69.3% (231/333)	60.8% (477/785)
Ho et al[12]	NR	NR	NR	NR	Mixed malignancies included
McGuirk et al[13]	100% (28/28)	NR	NR	NR	Margin status reported for all cases1

¹McGuirk et al[13] reported clear margins for all 28 cases but did not use “R0” terminology explicitly. Pooled analyses include only comparative studies[6,9], non-comparative data are reported descriptively[7,12,13].

RLR: Robotic liver resection; LLR: Laparoscopic liver resection; OLR: Open liver resection; OS: Overall survival; NR: Not reported; NS: Not statistically significant.