ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Comparative effectiveness of human scope assistant versus robotic scope holder in laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficiency in image-guided robotic and conventional camera steering: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Trial
- Clinical advantages of a new collaborative assistant robot (ANSUR surgical unit) in laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Solo surgeon ambulatory magnetic-assisted robotic surgery (MARS): initial 51 cases with high patient satisfaction.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Application and advantages of a joystick-controlled robotic scope holder in transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach: a comparative study.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of active versus passive robotic-endoscope-holder-assisted unisurgeon uniportal thoracoscopic surgery in terms of surgical efficacy and patient safety.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with a joystick-guided robotic scope holder (Soloassist II®): retrospective comparative study with human assistant.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral types of robotic scope holders have been developed to date, but there are only some experimental reports or the results of small clinical cases. The Soloassist® system is a unique robotic scope holder with which the surgeon can control the field of view by a joystick. We evaluated the efficacy of Soloassist in laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe investigated operative time, blood loss, setup time, length of hospital stay, and the number of participating surgeons in 273 laparoscopic colorectal resections, including 130 cases with human assistant (HA group) and 143 cases with Soloassist (SA group). Additionally, we also used logistic regression of the perioperative factors for the propensity score calculation to balance the bias.
resultsThe number of participating surgeons was apparently less in the SA group (HA group: 3.3 vs. SA group: 2.5, p < 0.01). The average operative time was shorter in the SA group, but there was no statistical difference (HA group: 287.0 min vs. SA group: 268.5 min, p = 0.07). No significant difference was found in setup time, conversion rate, perioperative complications, and length of hospital stay. There was no conversion case to human scope assistant and no system-specific adverse event. Similar results were observed between two groups after propensity score matching.
conclusionLaparoscopic colorectal resection with Soloassist is safe and feasible. The present study demonstrated that Soloassist system provided the possibilities of saving human resources in laparoscopic colorectal resection without prolonged operative time or system-specific morbidity. Soloassist is an effective robot-assisted surgical instrument for colorectal surgery.
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.