ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Minimally Invasive Bimanual Fetal Surgery-A Review.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic surgery in healthcare: current challenges, technological advances, and global implementation prospects.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Minimally Invasive Fetoscopic Resection of Life-Threatening Amniotic Band Constrictions in a Human Fetus at 22 + 2 Weeks of Gestation Complicated by Subtotal Chorioamniotic Separation and Partial Placental Abruption.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this review is to discuss experimental and clinical techniques and interventions of fetal surgery which have been performed minimally invasively by the means of a three-port approach for the fetoscope and instruments for the left and right hand of the surgeon (bimanual minimally invasive fetal surgery).
methodsa print and electronic literature search was performed; the titles and abstracts were screened and included reports were reviewed in a two-step approach. First, reports other than minimally invasive fetal surgery were excluded, then a full text review and analysis of the reported data was performed.
results17 reports were included. The heterogeneity of the included reports was high. Although reports on human fetoscopic surgical procedures can be found, most of them do not pick out bimanual fetal surgery as a central theme but rather address interventions applying a fetoscope with a working channel for a laser fiber, needle or flexible instrument. Most reports were on experimentation in animal models, the human application of minimally invasive fetoscopic bimanual surgery is rare and has at best been explored for the prenatal treatment of spina bifida. Some reported bimanual fetoscopic procedures were performed on the exteriorized uterus via a maternal laparotomy and can therefore not be classified as being truly minimally invasive. DISCUSSION: our results demonstrate that minimally invasive fetoscopic bimanual surgery is rare, even in animal models, excluding many other techniques and procedures that are loosely termed 'minimally invasive fetal surgery' which we suggest to better label as 'interventions'. Thus, more research on percutaneous minimally invasive bimanual fetoscopic surgery is warranted, with the aim to reduce the maternal, uterine and fetal trauma for correction of congenital malformations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.