Trial reportInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2017
Randomized controlled trial comparing operative times between standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy.
Trial report in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02118974 (Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Conventional Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Conventional Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus robotic abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Update of Robotic Surgery in Benign Gynecological Pathology: Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Pooled it
- Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Complications, recurrence, and survival rates for endometrial and cervical cancer treated by minimally invasive surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2026Article
- Is pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis needed in robotic-assisted hysterectomy? A big data study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Learning curves, safety, and experiences of a tertiary surgical center in the introduction of robotic-assisted surgery in gynecologic oncology.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Multicenter evaluation of the DEXTER® Robotic Surgery System for Total Hysterectomy with Adnexal Surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Observational
- Introduction of Robot-assisted Surgery for Benign Total Hysterectomy with Salpingectomy: Learning Curve, Safety and Experience in a Tertiary Surgical Center.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Different minimally invasive surgical methods to hysterectomy for benign gynecological disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Health science reports · 2024Review
- How does robotic surgery affect gynecology patient care?Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- Review
- Fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized trials in comparing laparoscopic versus robotic abdominopelvic surgeries.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Review
- Robotic hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy: is it still more costly to perform?Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- The current status of robotic surgery for endometrial cancer in Japan.Global health & medicine · 2022Review
- Surgical and Patient Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2021Review
- Article
- Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2020Article
- Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology-The Future Is Here.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2017Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the operative time between robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomies and standard laparoscopic hysterectomies.
methodsA prospective, randomized controlled trial enrolled women aged 18-80 years attending Penn State Hershey Medical Center between April 23 and October 20, 2014 to undergo hysterectomy. Participants were randomized using a random number generator to undergo either robot-assisted or standard laparoscopic hysterectomy. The primary outcome was the total operative time (surgeon incision to surgeon stop, including robot docking time, if applicable). Intention-to-treat analyses were performed and the operative time was compared between the two treatments for non-inferiority, defined as a difference in operative time of no longer than 15 minutes.
resultsThere were 72 patients randomized to each treatment arm. The mean operative time was 73.9 minutes (median 67.0 minutes; interquartile range 59.0-83.0 minutes) in the robot-assisted hysterectomy group and 74.9 minutes (median 65.5 minutes; interquartile range 57.0-90.5 minutes) in the standard laparoscopic hysterectomy group. The upper bound of the 95% confidence interval of the difference in operative time was 6.6 minutes, below the 15-minute measure of non-inferiority.
conclusionWhen performed by a surgeon experienced in both techniques, the operative time for robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy was non-inferior to that achieved with standard laparoscopic hysterectomy. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02118974.
Indexed as
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.