SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2023
Volume-outcome relationship in intra-abdominal robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic and open surgery: an overview of systematic reviews.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Global research trends and thematic evolution in robot-assisted ureteral reconstructive surgery: a bibliometric and visualisation study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Surgery in Gynecology: Balancing Clinical Benefit, Cost-Effectiveness, and Accessibility.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: A Nationwide Population-based Analysis in Taiwan.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Hinotori vs. da Vinci: a multi-institutional study on robot-assisted radical prostatectomy outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of robotic exposure among gynecological surgeons: results of survey from the young European advocates of robotic surgery (YEARS).Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Economic assessment of next-generation robotic surgical systems compared with the multiport da Vinci platform: a comprehensive review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Clinical efficacy of robot-assisted thymectomy for large thymomas: a dual analysis of national and single-institution data.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- A national cross-sectional analysis of stakeholder views regarding the practice and governance of robotic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Improved robotic-assisted cardiac surgery outcomes with greater hospital volume: a national representative cohort analysis of 10,543 cardiac surgery surgeries.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Intelligent medicine in focus: the 5 stages of evolution in robot-assisted surgery for prostate cancer in the past 20 years and future implications.Military Medical Research · 2024Review
- Minimum Volume Standards: An Incentive To Perform More Radical Cystectomies?European urology open science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) expands to smaller centres, platforms are shared between specialities. Healthcare providers must consider case volume and mix required to maintain quality and cost-effectiveness. This can be informed, in-part, by the volume-outcome relationship. We perform a systematic review to describe the volume-outcome relationship in intra-abdominal robotic-assisted surgery to report on suggested minimum volumes standards. A literature search of Medline, NICE Evidence Search, Health Technology Assessment Database and Cochrane Library using the terms: "robot*", "surgery", "volume" and "outcome" was performed. The included procedures were gynecological: hysterectomy, urological: partial and radical nephrectomy, cystectomy, prostatectomy, and general surgical: colectomy, esophagectomy. Hospital and surgeon volume measures and all reported outcomes were analysed. 41 studies, including 983,149 procedures, met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and the retrieved data was synthesised in a narrative review. Significant volume-outcome relationships were described in relation to key outcome measures, including operative time, complications, positive margins, lymph node yield and cost. Annual surgeon and hospital volume thresholds were described. We concluded that in centres with an annual volume of fewer than 10 cases of a given procedure, having multiple surgeons performing these procedures led to worse outcomes and, therefore, opportunities should be sought to perform other complimentary robotic procedures or undertake joint cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36315379What 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.