Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37670151›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023

iOCT-guided simulated subretinal injections: a comparison between manual and robot-assisted techniques in an ex-vivo porcine model.

Niklas A Maierhofer, Anne-Marie Jablonka, Hessam Roodaki, M Ali Nasseri, Abouzar Eslami, Julian Klaas, Chris P Lohmann, Mathias Maier, Daniel Zapp

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Surgical Approaches to Retinal Gene Therapy: 2025 Update.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Autonomous Needle Navigation in Subretinal Injections via iOCT.IEEE robotics and automation letters · 2024
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Niklas A Maierhofer *Klinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. niklas.maierhofer@googlemail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5587-9639
Anne-Marie Jablonka *Klinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Hessam RoodakiTranslational Research Lab, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Munich, Germany.
M Ali NasseriKlinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Abouzar EslamiTranslational Research Lab, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Munich, Germany.
Julian KlaasKlinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Chris P LohmannKlinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Mathias MaierKlinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Daniel ZappKlinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Klinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde Universitätsklinikum Regensburg · DECarl Zeiss (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare robot-assisted and manual subretinal injections in terms of successful subretinal blistering, reflux incidences and damage of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE). Subretinal injection was simulated on 84 ex-vivo porcine eyes with half of the interventions being carried out manually and the other half by controlling a custom-built robot in a master-slave fashion. After pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), the retinal target spot was determined under a LUMERA 700 microscope with microscope-integrated intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) RESCAN 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). For injection, a 1 ml syringe filled with perfluorocarbon liquid (PFCL) was tipped with a 40-gauge metal cannula (Incyto Co., Ltd., South Korea). In one set of trials, the needle was attached to the robot's end joint and maneuvered robotically to the retinal target site. In another set of trials, approaching the retina was performed manually. Intraretinal cannula-tip depth was monitored continuously via iOCT. At sufficient depth, PFCL was injected into the subretinal space. iOCT images and fundus video recordings were used to evaluate the surgical outcome. Robotic injections showed more often successful subretinal blistering (73.7% vs. 61.8%, p > 0.05) and a significantly lower incidence of reflux (23.7% vs. 58.8%, p < 0.01). Although larger tip depths were achieved in successful manual trials, RPE penetration occurred in 10.5% of robotic but in 26.5% of manual cases (p > 0.05). In conclusion, significantly less reflux incidences were achieved with the use of a robot. Furthermore, RPE penetrations occurred less and successful blistering more frequently when performing robotic surgery.

Indexed as

RoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAnimalsHumansRetinaSwineTomography, Optical CoherenceVitrectomyMinimally invasive ophthalmic surgeryOphthalmologyRobotic eye surgeryRobotic injectionRobotic surgerySubretinal injectionVitreoretinal surgery

Identifiers

PMID37670151
PMCPMC10678791
OpenAlexW4386448539

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.