ReviewArab journal of urology2018
Review of the role of robotic surgery in male infertility.
Review in Arab journal of urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic-assisted microsurgery in andrology: a systematic review.Asian journal of andrology · 2023Pooled it
- Robot-assisted vasovasostomy for vasectomy reversal: long-term outcomes from a high-volume tertiary centre.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Andrology: From Semen Analysis to Image Diagnostics.The world journal of men's health · 2024Review
- Technological Advancements in Male Infertility Microsurgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Artificial Intelligence and Its Impact on Urological Diseases and Management: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- 3D digital image microscope system-assisted vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy in rats.Asian journal of andrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo present the current state of the art in various robot-assisted microsurgical procedures in male infertility and review the latest literature, as the technology in infertility procedures has substantially developed since the incorporation of the Vinci® robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe search strategy in this review was conducted in accordance with Cochrane guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A search strategy was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane electronic databases (from 2000 to present) to identify studies that included both robotic and male infertility.
resultsIn all, 23 studies were found, 12 of which met our inclusion criteria. Articles were excluded if the study did not include both male infertility and robotics.
conclusionsRobotic assistance for microsurgical procedures in male infertility appears to be safe and feasible. It has several advantages including elimination of tremor, multi-view magnification, additional instrument arms, and enhanced dexterity with articulating instrument arms. It also has a short learning curve with a small skin incision. However, larger, prospective studies are needed to establish the clinical benefits over standard microsurgery.
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.