Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31509506›Full record

ReviewTurkish journal of urology2019

The current state and the future of robotic surgery in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery.

Rachael D Sussman, Benoit Peyronnet, Benjamin M Brucker

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Turkish journal of urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachael D SussmanDepartment of Urology, New York University, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0719-9465
Benoit PeyronnetDepartment of Urology, New York University, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8157-2825
Benjamin M BruckerDepartment of Urology, New York University, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1699-3871
New York University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we review the current uses and future directions of robotic surgery in the field of female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery. Pelvic surgery is ideal for the use of surgical robots, which provide improved visualization and ease of suturing deep within the pelvis. Robots have been successfully used for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, in procedures such as sacrocolpopexy, sacrohysteropexy, and uterosacral ligament plication. Surgeons have used the robotic successfully to treat various etiologies of female pelvic pain including fibroids, endometriosis, and nerve entrapment. Robotic repair of iatrogenic injury has been described with excellent outcomes and avoidance of conversion to open surgery in the event of an injury caused using the robotic platform. While more data is needed on this topic, there has been increasing interest in using the robot for urologic reconstruction including repair of vesico-vaginal fistula, cystectomy, augmentation cystoplasty, and continent and non-continent diversions. Recently the use of the robot has been described in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in females, with robotic placement of an artificial urinary sphincter. While robotic surgery is associated with increased cost, the outcomes of robotic surgery in female urology are promising. More studies that properly evaluate the benefits of robotic surgery as compared to open and laparoscopic approaches are needed.

Identifiers

PMID31509506
PMCPMC6739090
OpenAlexW2973207985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.