Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35956002›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Robot-Assisted Tubal Reanastomosis after Sterilization: A Choice for Family Planning.

Arwa Salehjawich, Veronika Günther, Zino Ruchay, Mazhar Salim Al Zoubi, Juhi Dhanawat, Nicolai Maass, Johannes Ackermann, Julian Pape, Ibrahim Alkatout

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Arwa SalehjawichDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Veronika GüntherDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Zino RuchayDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5439-8817
Mazhar Salim Al ZoubiDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid 211-63, Jordan.ORCID 0000-0003-0248-4777
Juhi DhanawatDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4273-1376
Nicolai MaassDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Johannes AckermannDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Julian PapeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Ibrahim AlkatoutDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3 (House C), 24105 Kiel, Germany.
University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein · DEYarmouk University · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A variety of procedures have been used for family planning. One of these is sterilization surgery, which can be reversed by a tubal reanastomosis. In the present report, we compare Robot-assisted tubal reanastomosis sterilization with other methods of family planning and discuss factors related to the choice of the approach. The keywords used for the electronic search in PubMed were family planning, sterilization, Robot-assisted, tubal reanastomosis, depression, and regret. The decision in favor of or against sterilization surgery has been a sensitive issue for several years. Robot-assisted technology is a modern and precise approach. It has contributed to the flexibility of the decision between sterilization and its reversal through tubal reanastomosis, as well as enhanced the success rate of the surgery. Based on our analysis of the published literature, we believe that Robot-assisted tubal anastomosis is the optimum approach. However, to ensure the quality of health care, the surgeon must be well trained, well versed with the anatomy of the fallopian tubes, and thoroughly informed on the psychological impact of family planning.

Indexed as

family planningregretrobot-assistedsterilizationtubal reanastomosis

Identifiers

PMID35956002
PMCPMC9369034
OpenAlexW4288427181

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.