Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36467353›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022

Comparison of robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery and manual surgery in different preclinical settings: a randomized trial.

Ting Wang, Jun Xia, Ling Jin, Danqi Zeng, Pisong Yan, Shengzhi Lin, Kai Huang, Haotian Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

8 authors.

Ting Wang *State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Jun Xia *School of Computer Science and Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Ling JinState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Danqi ZengState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.
Pisong YanCloud Intelligent Care Technology (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Shengzhi LinGuangzhou Oculotronics Medical Instrument Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Kai HuangSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Haotian LinState Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Progress in the field of surgical robotics has the potential to allow surgeons to reduce the limitations of human hands and has substantially improved the dexterity and accuracy of surgery. This study aimed to compare robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery with manual surgery in a simulated setting involving donor porcine eyes. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 10 experienced vitreoretinal experts and 10 residents. Participants were randomized to start with either manual or robot-assisted surgery (n=5 in each group). Participants completed 3 tests consisting of 2 vitreoretinal modules on a virtual-reality simulator and microcannulation in donor porcine eyes. The primary outcome measures were as follows: test completion time, surgical accuracy and tremor control provided by the simulator, and the feasibility of microcannulation in donor porcine eyes. Results: Robot-assisted surgery supported better accuracy and tremor control than manual surgery for vitreoretinal experts (P=0.028 and P=0.002, respectively) and residents (P=0.025 and P<0.001, respectively). Residents improved their microcannulation performance with the assistance of the robot (P=0.038) to a level comparable to that of experts (P=0.49). Robot-assisted surgery was less time-efficient than manual surgery for both residents (P<0.001) and vitreoretinal experts (P<0.001). Conclusions: Compared with manual surgery, robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery improves the stability of instrument handling and the accuracy of surgery. Robot-assisted surgeries have the potential to shorten the learning curve for residents and improve surgical performance.

Indexed as

accuracymanual surgeryrobot-assisted surgerytremor controlVitreoretinal surgery

Identifiers

PMID36467353
PMCPMC9708475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.