ReviewEndoscopy international open2014
Flexible platforms for natural orifice transluminal and endoluminal surgery.
Review in Endoscopy international open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trends and Clinical Impact of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Procedures on Acute Heart Failure in Spain (2002-2017).Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Wire-driven flexible manipulator with constrained spherical joints for minimally invasive surgery.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2019Article
- Endoscopic resection of the pancreatic tail and subsequent wound healing mechanisms in a porcine model.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Flexible Gastro-intestinal Endoscopy - Clinical Challenges and Technical Achievements.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2017Review
- Percutaneous transgastric endoscopic tube ileostomy in a porcine survival model.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Article
- The evolution of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: where are we now?Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The flexible endoscope is playing an increasingly pivotal role in minimally invasive transluminal and endoluminal surgery. Whilst the flexible nature of the platform is desirable in order to navigate through the abdominal cavity or through a lumen, there are a number of issues with using the platform for this purpose. The challenges associated with using flexible endoscopes such as a lack of triangulation of instruments and force transmission, which is often inadequate for endoscopic surgery are discussed in this review. As a result of these difficulties, a number of mechanically and robotically driven devices based upon the flexible endoscope are emerging. The design of these devices and potential problems are also reviewed. Finally, future robotic systems which are still in the development and validation stage are briefly discussed. The field of gastroenterology is diverging. The narrowing divide between minimally invasive and endoluminal surgery has led to a surge of innovative and novel devices which may in the future enable precise, seamless and scar less surgery.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.