Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29196867›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2018

Prevalence of haptic feedback in robot-mediated surgery: a systematic review of literature.

Farshid Amirabdollahian, Salvatore Livatino, Behrad Vahedi, Radhika Gudipati, Patrick Sheen, Shan Gawrie-Mohan, Nikhil Vasdev

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Tactile Feedback in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Systematic Review.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Transoral robotic surgery in head and neck cancer: an umbrella review of meta-analyses.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Experimental evaluation of virtual needle insertion framework with enhanced haptic feedback.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Farshid AmirabdollahianSchool of Computer Science, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK. f.amirabdollahian2@herts.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7007-2227
Salvatore LivatinoSchool of Engineering, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK.
Behrad VahediSchool of Engineering, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK.
Radhika GudipatiSchool of Computer Science, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK.
Patrick SheenSchool of Engineering, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK.
Shan Gawrie-MohanDepartment of Anaesthetics, Lister Hospital, Stevenage, SG1 4AB, UK.
Nikhil VasdevDepartment of Urology, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire Urological Cancer Centre, Lister Hospital, Stevenage, SG1 4AB, UK.
University of Hertfordshire · GBLister Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the successful uptake and inclusion of robotic systems in minimally invasive surgery and with the increasing application of robotic surgery (RS) in numerous surgical specialities worldwide, there is now a need to develop and enhance the technology further. One such improvement is the implementation and amalgamation of haptic feedback technology into RS which will permit the operating surgeon on the console to receive haptic information on the type of tissue being operated on. The main advantage of using this is to allow the operating surgeon to feel and control the amount of force applied to different tissues during surgery thus minimising the risk of tissue damage due to both the direct and indirect effects of excessive tissue force or tension being applied during RS. We performed a two-rater systematic review to identify the latest developments and potential avenues of improving technology in the application and implementation of haptic feedback technology to the operating surgeon on the console during RS. This review provides a summary of technological enhancements in RS, considering different stages of work, from proof of concept to cadaver tissue testing, surgery in animals, and finally real implementation in surgical practice. We identify that at the time of this review, while there is a unanimous agreement regarding need for haptic and tactile feedback, there are no solutions or products available that address this need. There is a scope and need for new developments in haptic augmentation for robot-mediated surgery with the aim of improving patient care and robotic surgical technology further.

Indexed as

TouchComputer SimulationDiscrimination, PsychologicalFeedback, SensoryHumansModels, AnimalRobotic Surgical ProceduresHapticsRobotic surgeryTactile enhancementTouch augmentation

Identifiers

PMID29196867
OpenAlexW2774051777

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.