Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28624343›Full record

ReviewReproductive biomedicine online2017

'Money for nothing'. The role of robotic-assisted laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis.

Nicola Berlanda, Maria Pina Frattaruolo, Giorgio Aimi, Marilena Farella, Giussy Barbara, Laura Buggio, Paolo Vercellini

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Reproductive biomedicine online, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nicola BerlandaUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy. Electronic address: nicola.berlanda@gmail.com.
Maria Pina FrattaruoloUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Giorgio AimiUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Marilena FarellaUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Giussy BarbaraUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Laura BuggioUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Paolo VercelliniUnità Operativa Dipartimentale Ginecologia Chirurgica e Endometriosi, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite higher costs for robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) than standard laparoscopy (SL), RAL treatment of endometriosis is performed without established indications. PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for 'robotic surgery' and 'endometriosis' or 'gynaecological benign disease' from January 2000 to December 2016. Full-length studies in English reporting original data were considered. Among 178 articles retrieved, 17 were eligible: 11 non-comparative (RAL only) and six comparative (RAL versus SL). Non-comparative studies included 445 patients. Mean operating time, blood loss and hospital stay were 226 min, 168 ml and 4 days. Major complications and laparotomy conversions were 3.1% and 1.3%. Eight studies reported pain improvement at 15-month follow-up. Comparative studies were all retrospective; 749 women underwent RAL and 705 SL. Operating time was longer for RAL in five studies. Major complications and laparotomy conversions for RAL and SL were 1.5% versus 0.3% and 0.3% versus 0.5%. One study reported pain reduction for RAL at 6-month follow-up. RAL treatment of endometriosis did not provide benefits over SL, overall and among subgroups of women with severe endometriosis, peritoneal endometriosis and obesity. Available evidence is low-quality, and data regarding long-term pain relief and pregnancy rates are lacking. RAL treatment of endometriosis should be performed only within controlled studies.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAdultEndometriosisFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment OutcomeEndometriosis-related costsEndometriosis treatmentLaparoscopic surgeryRobotic-assisted laparoscopy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.