ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery
Complication reports for robotic surgery using three arms by a single surgeon at a single institution.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- In vivo evaluation of tissue damage from varying grasping forces using the Saroa surgical system.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Surgical Frontiers: A Comparative Review of Robotics Versus Laparoscopy in Gynecological Interventions.Cureus · 2023Review
- Multi-Port Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Clinical and Fertility Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate perioperative complications related to robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for management of gynaecologic disorders. MATERIALS AND
methodsEight hundred and fifty-one women who underwent robotic procedures between December 2011 and April 2015 were retrospectively included for analysis. Patient demographics, surgical outcomes and complications were evaluated.
resultsThe overall complication rate was 5.5%, whereas the rate of complications for oncologic cases was 8.4%. Intra-operative complications (n = 7, 0.8%) consisted of five cases of bowel lacerations, one case of ureter laceration and one case of bladder injury. Early and late post-operative complications were 4.0% (n = 34) and 0.8% (n = 6), respectively. Six patients (0.7%) experienced Grade III complications based on the Clavien-Dindo classification and required further surgical intervention.
conclusionRobotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery is a feasible approach for management of gynaecologic disorders; the complication rates for this type of procedure are acceptable.
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.