Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30140462›Full record

ReviewArab journal of urology2018

The age of robotic surgery - Is laparoscopy dead?

Hartwig Schwaibold, Felix Wiesend, Christian Bach

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Role of laparoscopy in the era of robotic surgery in urology in developing countries.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    Review
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

3 authors.

Hartwig SchwaiboldKlinikum am Steinenberg, Reutlingen, Germany.
Felix WiesendKlinikum am Steinenberg, Reutlingen, Germany.
Christian BachKlinikum am Steinenberg, Reutlingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRobot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) has become a widely used technology in urology. Urological procedures that are now being routinely performed robotically are: radical prostatectomy (RP), radical cystectomy (RC), renal procedures - mainly partial nephrectomy (PN), and pyeloplasty, as well as ureteric re-implantation and adrenalectomy.

methodsThis non-systematic review of the literature examines the effectiveness of RALS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for the most relevant urological procedures.

resultsFor robot-assisted RP there seems to be an advantage in terms of continence and potency over laparoscopy. Robot-assisted RC seems equal in terms of oncological outcome but with lower complication rates; however, the effect of intracorporeal urinary diversion has hardly been examined. Robotic PN has proven safe and is most likely superior to conventional laparoscopy, whereas there does not seem to be a real advantage for the robot in radical nephrectomy. For reconstructive procedures, e.g. pyeloplasty and ureteric re-implantation, there seems to be advantages in terms of operating time.

conclusionsWe found substantial, albeit mostly low-quality evidence, that robotic operations can have better outcomes than procedures performed laparoscopically. However, in light of the significant costs and because high-quality data from prospective randomised trials are still missing, conventional urological laparoscopy is certainly not 'dead' yet.

Indexed as

3D, three-dimensionaldVSS, da Vinci Surgical SystemEAU, European Association of UrologyICG, indocyanine greenIVC, inferior vena cavaLaparoscopicNSGCT, non-seminomatous germ cell tumourPSM, positive surgical marginRAIL, robot-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomyRALS, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeryRALUR, robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteric re-implantation(RA)PN, (robot-assisted) partial nephrectomy(RA)RN, (robot-assisted) radical nephrectomy(RA-)RPLND, (robot-assisted) retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (RA)RC, (robot-assisted) radical cystectomy(RA)RP, (robot-assisted) radical prostatectomyRoboticRobotic-assisted radical prostatectomyRobotic urological surgeryWIT, warm ischaemia time

Identifiers

PMID30140462
PMCPMC6104663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.