Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36002682›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

Clinical implementation of the Versius robotic surgical system in visceral surgery-A single centre experience and review of the first 175 patients.

Stefan Wehrmann, Kristin Tischendorf, Torsten Mehlhorn, Annelie Lorenz, Michael Gündel, Hagen Rudolph, Lutz Mirow

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The death of laparoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stefan WehrmannDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany. stefanwehrmann@outlook.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7894-5897
Kristin TischendorfDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Torsten MehlhornDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Annelie LorenzDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Michael GündelDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Hagen RudolphDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Lutz MirowDepartement of General and Visceral Surgery, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Medical Campus of the Technische Universität Dresden, Chemnitz, Germany.
Klinikum Chemnitz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic surgical systems introduce new opportunities for the minimal accessed surgeon. The combination of three-dimensional magnified vision and articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom provide a good and safe alternative to laparoscopic surgery. Indeed some of these features may support the case that robotic surgery may be better than conventional surgery. In this study, we report our experience of robotic surgery by using the first open console, modular robotic platform in Germany, the Versius Surgical System®.

methodsWe implemented the Versius Surgical System® in April 2021 at our centre. Since then, 175 patients received robotic assisted surgery. All patients were included in this study. Data were analysed by using the SPSS (IBM Statistics) Software.

results175 patients underwent robotic surgery. We started the implementation of the system by performing cholecystectomy. After the first 50 successful operations, we began to perform robotic assisted oncological resections. We saw a learning curve with improvements in total operative time and console time until reaching a standard similar to conventional laparoscopic surgery. The perioperative complication-ratio was equivalent for operations matched the histopathological outcome (MERCURY graduation, R0-staus) at oncological resections. However, four patients had to be revised because of secondary bleeding. Interestingly the total hospital stay for right sided hemicolectomy and oesophagus-resection was shorter than in laparoscopic surgery. In our opinion, the Versius Surgical System® seems to be a good, promising system and a safe alternative to other robotic systems, although any comparison is still missing. The open design enabling a better communication between console surgeon and bedside-unit assistant as well as the mobile bedside units are very interesting and allow more flexibility. Nevertheless, there are limitations of the system that require a direct comparison with other robotic systems as well as continuous advancement.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsColectomyHumansMinimal invasive surgeryRobotic surgeryRobotic systemVersius

Identifiers

PMID36002682
PMCPMC9401193
OpenAlexW4293103416

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.