Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30697566›Full record

ReviewRobotic surgery (Auckland)2017

The da Vinci Xi: a review of its capabilities, versatility, and potential role in robotic colorectal surgery.

James Chi-Yong Ngu, Charles Bih-Shiou Tsang, Dean Chi-Siong Koh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Robotic surgery (Auckland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Robotic surgery (R-TAMIS): a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Effects of Modifying Hinotori Surgical Robot System on the Learning Curve of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

3 authors.

James Chi-Yong NguDepartment of General Surgery, Changi General Hospital, james_ngu@cgh.com.sg.
Charles Bih-Shiou TsangDepartment of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore.
Dean Chi-Siong KohDepartment of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Xi is the latest da Vinci surgical system approved for use in colorectal surgery. With its novel overhead architecture, slimmer boom-mounted arms, extended instrument reach, guided targeting, and integrated auxiliary technology, the Xi manages to address several limitations of earlier models. The versatility of this new system allows it to be implemented in a wide range of colorectal procedures - from complex multiquadrant colectomies to challenging mesorectal dissections in the pelvis. While commonly criticized for its cost and prolonged operative time, robotic colorectal surgery holds the potential for enhanced ergonomics, superior precision, and a reduction in the learning curve involved in training an expert surgeon. This review appraises the existing literature on robotic colorectal surgery while elaborating how the improved capabilities of the Xi serve to usher in a new era of minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Indexed as

colorectalminimally invasivemultiquadrantreviewsurgery

Identifiers

PMID30697566
PMCPMC6193435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.