ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Robotic-assisted vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery versus robotic-assisted single-site port for benign hysterectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes.
Article 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 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of Robotic vNOTES Surgery: Current Applications, Advantages, and Future Directions.Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2026Review
- Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) for hysterectomy strategic repositioning of the vaginal route through technological evolution and emerging surgical variants.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2026Review
- Single-Port surgical robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (v-NOTES) hysterectomy and double salpingectomy with pneumoperitoneum-free: surgical technique.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative outcomes of robotic single-port vNOTES versus robotic-Xi assisted single-incision transumbilical surgery for hysterectomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Economic evaluation of robot-assisted, conventional laparoscopic, and open myomectomy: a 10-year single-center retrospective study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Stage-Specific outcomes of robotic transvaginal NOTES hysterectomy in endometriosis: A comparative study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The feasibility and surgical outcomes of robotic vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic single port hysterectomy for benign gynecologic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.AJOG global reports · 2025Review
- Robotic single port versus robotic multiple port transvaginal orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to evaluate the surgical outcomes for robotic-assisted vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (R-VNOTES) hysterectomy versus robotic-assisted single-site port (RSSP) hysterectomy when performed for benign indications. This is a retrospective chart review in an academic tertiary setting. 404 patients underwent hysterectomy for benign indications. R-VNOTES hysterectomy and RSSP hysterectomy were performed by a single minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon from January 2015 to August 2022. The primary outcome of our study was total operative time (minutes). Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss (mL), length of hospital stay (days), and postoperative pain score. Other intraoperative and postoperative surgical complications were also compared. 159 patients underwent R-VNOTES hysterectomy, and 269 patients underwent RSSP hysterectomy. Median length of surgery (minutes) demonstrated a statistically significant shorter operative time in the R-VNOTES hysterectomy group when compared to the RSSP hysterectomy group, (132 min versus 146 min, respectively, p = 0.0001). Additionally, patients in the R-VNOTES hysterectomy group experienced decreased postoperative pain levels at week 1 (6 versus 7, respectively, p = 0.01) and week 3 (1.5 versus 2.5, respectively, p = 0.01) after surgery. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups when comparing length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and weight of the uterus. There was no difference in rates of urinary tract infection, blood transfusion, bowel injury, readmission, reoperation, conversion, deep surgical site infection, and venous thromboembolism between both groups. However, there was a higher rate of superficial SSI in the RSSP hysterectomy group (0.6% versus 4.5%, respectively, p = 0.03). When compared to RSSP hysterectomy, R-VNOTES hysterectomy is safe and feasible, as both approaches have comparable surgical outcomes. Patients undergoing R-VNOTES hysterectomy had shorter length of surgery, decreased postoperative pain, and lower rates of superficial surgical site infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37523047What 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.