SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2023
A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing robotic single-site versus multi-port myomectomy.
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. It is linked to trial NCT06244251 (Comparison of Operational Outcomes and Long-term Benefits Between Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery and Multi-port Laparoscopy in Treating Uterine Fibroids), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Comparison of Operational Outcomes and Long-term Benefits Between Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery and Multi-port Laparoscopy in Treating Uterine Fibroids
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Single incision robotic myomectomy: selection criteria, learning curve and cost.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Surgical management of uterine fibroids.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Review
- Comment on: "Comparison of the Hinotori surgical robot with the da Vinci robotic system in radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta‑analysis".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robotic multi-site myomectomy (RMSM) with those of robotic single-site myomectomy (RSSM). We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for articles comparing RMSM and RSSM until March 2023. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager V5.3 (Cochrane), and the main outcomes examined were perioperative outcomes and complications. A total of five studies, covering 823 patients, were included in the analysis. The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between RMSM and RSSM with regard to docking time (p = 0.9), console time (p = 0.37), estimated blood loss (p = 0.38), postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) loss (p = 0.61), transfusion rate (p = 0.25), length of stay (p = 0.08), conversion (p = 0.36), postoperative fever (p = 0.46), intraoperative complication (p = 0.23), or postoperative complication (p = 0.12). However, compared to RMSM, RSSM was found to have a shorter morcellation time (weighted mean difference [WMD] - 4.52 min; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 6.89 to 2.15; p = 0.0002), less total operative time (WMD - 9.83 min; 95% CI - 18.27 to - 1.38; p = 0.02), lower Hb change (WMD - 0.28 g/dL; 95% CI - 0.49 to - 0.07; p = 0.008), and fewer overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.92; p = 0.02). Our findings suggest that RSSM is a safe and effective alternative to RMSM for the most studied outcomes. Further randomized studies are necessary to validate these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37093509What 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.