Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36415384›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

Robotic Surgery: The Future of Gynaecology.

Isha Chandrakar, Sandhya Pajai, Shikha Toshniwal

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors.

Isha ChandrakarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.
Sandhya PajaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.
Shikha ToshniwalDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robot-assisted surgery is the next phase in the process of transhumanism. Presently, robotic surgery is used in various benign and malignant gynaecological procedures. Robot-assisted surgery is significantly superior to open surgeries in post-surgical hospital stays; however, the difference is less significant in the case of laparoscopic surgery. Estimated blood loss in robotic surgery may be less. Regarding postoperative time, the results have been inconsistent due to variations in surgeons' experience. The primary drawbacks of robotic systems are their high installation and maintenance costs and lack of tactile feedback. Though robotic surgery allows easy dissection and fine suturing and has a faster recovery rate, to decide whether it should become the mainstream of gynaecological procedures, more randomized controlled trials are needed.

Indexed as

cervical cancerda vinci xirobotic hysterectomyrobotic myomectomyzeus

Identifiers

PMID36415384
PMCPMC9676702

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.