ArticleRobotic surgery (Auckland)2017
Performing all major surgical procedures robotically will prolong wait times for surgery.
Article in Robotic surgery (Auckland), 2017. 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.
- Target trial on the outcomes of laparoscopic compared to robotic-assisted proctectomy in stage II-III rectal cancer.Updates in surgery · 2026Trial
- Human Factors Integration in Robotic Surgery.Human factors · 2024Review
- The Impact of New Surgical Techniques on Geographical Unwarranted Variation: The Case of Benign Hysterectomy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Safety of Prolonged Wait Time for Nephrectomy for Clinically Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Nephrectomy Delay of More than 10 Weeks from Diagnosis Is Associated with Decreased Overall Survival in pT3 RCC.Journal of kidney cancer and VHL · 2021Article
- Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews is indexed in PubMed.Robotic surgery (Auckland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This article aimed to assess the burden of scheduling major urologic oncology procedures if all cases were performed robotically and to determine whether this would increase the time a patient would have to wait for surgery. We retrospectively determined the number of prostatectomies, radical nephrectomies, partial nephrectomies, and cystectomies at a single institution for one calendar year. A hypothetical situation was then constructed where all procedures were performed robotically. Using the allotted number of days that each surgeon was able to schedule robotic procedures, we analyzed the amount of time it would take to schedule and complete all cases. Five fellowship-trained surgeons were included in the study and accounted for 317 surgical cases. Three of the surgeons had dedicated robotic surgery (RS) time (block time), while two surgeons scheduled when there was non-dedicated RS time (open time) available. If all cases were performed robotically an additional 32 days would be needed, which could significantly increase the wait time to surgery. The limited number of robotic systems available in most hospitals creates a bottleneck effect; whereby increasing the number of cases would considerably lengthen the waiting time patients have for surgery. As RS becomes increasingly more commonplace in urology and other surgical fields, this could create a significant problem for health care systems.
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.