Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35765756›Full record

ArticleUrologia2022

The new surgical robotic platform HUGO

Angelo Totaro, Marco Campetella, Riccardo Bientinesi, Carlo Gandi, Giuseppe Palermo, Andrea Russo, Paola Aceto, PierFrancesco Bassi, Emilio Sacco

RetractedAbstract readRetracted Publication
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Urologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medtronic's HugoJournal of robotic surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic Review and Clinical Outcomes of new Robotic Systems in Urology.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Angelo TotaroDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Marco CampetellaDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Riccardo BientinesiDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0757-152X
Carlo GandiDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1349-7696
Giuseppe PalermoDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Andrea RussoFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Anesthesiology Emergency and Intenive Care Medicine, Roma, Italy.
Paola AcetoFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Anesthesiology Emergency and Intenive Care Medicine, Roma, Italy.
PierFrancesco BassiDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Emilio SaccoDepartment of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo date, robotic surgery in urology is well established all over the world. The newest platform on the market is the HUGO™ RAS system, developed by Medtronic. In this paper we provide a brief description of the system and describe our system set-up and surgical approach with this new platform in our initial experience of robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP) series. MATERIALS AND

methodsAfter an official training, seven consecutive patients affected by localized prostate cancer underwent RARP with HUGO

resultsOur operating room setup has shown to be safe, effective, and easy replicable. During our series, operative times appeared to be easy reproducible and comparable to those obtained with daVinci system. No major system faults and conflicts between robotic arms were observed after the first procedure.

conclusionsOur surgical approach and system configuration for performing RARP with the new HUGO™ RAS system appears to be safe, efficient and easy reproducible.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansMaleProstateProstatectomyDockingHUGO-RAS prostatectomyHUGO systemrobotic platformrobotic prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID35765756
OpenAlexW4283722153

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.