Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38046941›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology

Current evidence of robotic-assisted surgery use in functional reconstructive and neuro-urology.

Hermione Tsoi, Sameh F Elnasharty, Mehmet Gokhan Culha, Sabrina De Cillis, Cyrille Guillot-Tantay, François Hervé, Tanja Hüesch, Nicholas Raison, Véronique Phé, Nadir I Osman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

10 authors.

Hermione TsoiDepartment of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Rd, Broomhall, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7779-7244
Sameh F ElnashartyDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
Mehmet Gokhan CulhaUniversity of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr. Cemil Tascioglu City Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4059-2293
Sabrina De CillisDepartment of Oncology, Division of Urology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano (Turin), Italy.
Cyrille Guillot-TantayHôpital Foch, Service d'urologie, Suresnes, France.
François HervéDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Tanja HüeschDepartment of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Nicholas RaisonDepartment of Urology, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Véronique PhéDepartment of Urology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Tenon Academic Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Nadir I OsmanDepartment of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of robot-assisted technology has been widely adopted in urological oncological surgery and its benefits have been well established. In recent years, robotic technology has also been used in several functional reconstructive and neuro-urology (FRNU) procedures. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current evidence in the use of robotic technology in the field of FRNU. We performed a PubMed-based literature search between July and August 2022. The keywords we included were 'robotic assisted', 'ureteric reimplantation', 'cystoplasty', 'ileal conduit', 'neobladder', 'sacrocolpopexy', 'colposuspension', 'artificial urinary sphincter', 'genitourinary fistula' and 'posterior urethral stenoses'. We identified the latest available evidence in the use of robotic technology in specific FRNU procedures such as the reconstruction of the ureters, bladder and urinary sphincter, urinary diversion, and repair of genitourinary prolapse and fistula. We found that there is a lack of prospective studies to assess the robotic-assisted approach in the field of FRNU. Despite this, the advantages that robotic technology can bring to the field of FRNU are evident, including better ergonomics and visual field, less blood loss and shorter hospital stays. There is therefore a need for further prospective studies with larger patient numbers and longer follow-up periods to establish the reproducibility of these results and the long-term efficacy of the procedures, as well as the impact on patient outcomes. Common index procedures and a standardized approach to these procedures should be identified to enhance training.

Indexed as

artificial urinary sphinctercolposuspensioncystoplastygenitourinary fistulaileal conduitneobladderposterior urethral stenosesrobotic assistedsacrocolpopexyureteric reimplantation

Identifiers

PMID38046941
PMCPMC10693211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.