ArticleYonago acta medica2016
The First Pilot Comprehensive Evaluation of the Outcomes of Different Types of Robotic Surgeries in the Different Surgical Departments: The Penta, Tetra and Trifecta Achievements in Robotic Surgeries.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2016. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of trifecta and pentafecta outcomes in T1a and T1b renal tumors following robotic partial nephrectomy: a retrospective study.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Perception of Young European Otolaryngologists toward Transoral Robotic Surgery in Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Adoption of otolaryngologist-head neck surgeons toward transoral robotic surgery: An international survey.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo ensure safe performance in robotic surgery, the Minimal Invasive Surgery Center (MISC) is composed of the anesthesiology department, five surgery departments and co-medical staff in our institution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of different types of robotic surgeries for cancer treatment (n = 326) from different surgery departments in the MISC.
methodsThe outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), partial nephrectomy (RAPN), transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for pharyngeal cancer, and robotic surgery for lung, gastric and rectal cancer were evaluated using the similar concept of pentafecta in RARP.
resultsThe pentafecta rates of RARP and robotic surgery for rectal cancer were 33.3 and 56.5%, respectively. The tetrafecta rates of RARP (excluding potency evaluation from pentafecta) and TORS were 48.4 and 57.1%, respectively. The trifecta rates of RAPN, robotic surgeries for lung and gastric cancer were 75.9, 74.2 and 84.2%, respectively. The failure of tetrafecta in RARP achievement was significantly associated with high risk than with low risk according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network classification.
conclusionThis is the world's first comprehensive evaluation of different types of robotic surgeries for cancer treatment in the constitutional framework of an academic institution. MISC, which provides the constitutional framework of an academic institution, is providing immeasurable benefits in terms of robotic surgery quality, and it may ultimately lead to high penta-, tetra-, and trifecta rates for robotic surgeries for cancer treatment in all surgical departments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27493484PMC4973019W2497372365What 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.