ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Coaxial-Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy: Surgical Outcomes Compared with Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy by Propensity Score Matching Analysis.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Two New Techniques Complementing Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy: Coaxial Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy vs. Hybrid Robotic Single-Site Myomectomy.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to introduce a coaxial-robotic single-site myomectomy (C-RSSM) technique to compensate for the shortcomings of robotic single-site myomectomy (RSSM) using semi-rigid instruments and to compare the surgical outcomes of C-RSSM and RSSM.
methodsThe medical records of 13 consecutive women who had undergone C-RSSM and 131 consecutive women who had undergone RSSM were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics and surgical outcomes after propensity score matching were evaluated and compared between the two groups.
resultsAccording to the propensity score matching results, the C-RSSM group had a lower estimated blood loss (75.0 vs. 210.5 mL,
conclusionsC-RSSM was found to be associated with shorter operative time and lower estimated blood loss. However, further prospective studies are needed to confirm these advantages.
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.