ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2019
Facility-level analysis of robot utilization across disciplines in the National Cancer Database.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Volume-outcome relationship in intra-abdominal robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of the wound healing and complications of zipper type closure adhesive tape and stapler for surgical wound suture: A randomized control, single-centre, open-label trial.International wound journal · 2024Trial
- Comparative analysis of Robotic-Assisted, Laparoscopic, and open radical nephrectomy: Utilization, Costs, and clinical outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Review
- Interpretable machine learning models based on multi-dimensional fusion data for predicting positive surgical margins in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Analyzing the emergence of surgical robotics in Africa: a scoping review of pioneering procedures, platforms utilized, and outcome meta-analysis.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2024Article
- The current status and global trends of clinical trials related to robotic surgery: a bibliometric and visualized study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Navigating Now and Next: Recent Advances and Future Horizons in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Where Do We Stand?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Embracing robotic surgery in low- and middle-income countries: Potential benefits, challenges, and scope in the future.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Review
- Article
- Diffusion and adoption of the surgical robot in urology.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Review
- Suprapubic Versus Urethral Catheter for Urinary Drainage After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Current urology reports · 2020Review
- Comparison of Cancer Specific Outcomes following Minimally Invasive and Open Surgical Resection of Early Stage Kidney Cancer from a National Cancer Registry.The Journal of urology · 2020Observational
- Robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer in the US: a skewed population.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
- Association between surgical approach and survival following resection of abdominopelvic malignancies.Journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate trends in contemporary robotic surgery across multiple organ sites as they relate to robotic prostatectomy volume. We queried the National Cancer Database for patients who underwent surgery from 2010 to 2013 for prostate, kidney, bladder, corpus uteri, uterus, cervix, colon, sigmoid, rectum, lung and bronchus. The trend between volumes of robotic surgery for each organ site was analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage test. Multivariable models were then created to determine independent predictors of robotic surgery within each organ site by calculating the odds ratio with 95% CI. Among the 566,399 surgical cases analyzed, 35.1% were performed using robot assistance. Institutions whose robotic prostatectomy volume was in the top 75 percentile compared to the bottom 25 percentile performed a larger percentage of robotic surgery on the following sites: kidney 32.6 vs. 28.8%, bladder 23.6 vs. 18.6%, uterus 52.5 vs. 47.7%, cervix 43.5 vs. 39.2%, colon 3.2 vs. 2.9%, rectum 10.7 vs. 8.9%, and lung 7.3 vs. 6.8% (all p < 0.0001). It appears that increased trends toward robotic surgery in urology have lead to increased robotic utilization within other surgical fields. Future analysis in benign utilizations of robotic surgery as well as outcome data comparing robotic to open approaches are needed to better understand the ever-evolving nature of minimally invasive surgery within the United States.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30062641What 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.