Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38179033›Full record

ArticleBJUI compass2024

A prospective study on single-port versus multiport patient-reported surgical outcomes.

Luca A Morgantini, Ahmad Alzein, Arthi Bharadwaj, Matthew S Del Pino, Erin Egan, Ashwin Ganesh, John Smith, Simone Crivellaro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJUI compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Dual robotic surgery: Da Vinci SPJournal of robotic surgery · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Roundup.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    Article
  13. Single-Port Robot assisted partial cystectomy for urachal adenocarcinoma.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    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

8 authors.

Luca A MorgantiniDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8965-6414
Ahmad AlzeinDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Arthi BharadwajDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Matthew S Del PinoDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Erin EganDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Ashwin GaneshDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
John SmithDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Simone CrivellaroDepartment of Urology University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: We sought to determine potential patient reported advantages of the da Vinci single-port (SP) robotic system for urological procedures compared with the previous model, the da Vinci multiport (MP) system. The SP model utilizes a single 30 to 40 mm incision rather than multiple 5 to 22 mm incisions. This project aims to prospectively investigate the impact of the novel SP system on patient reported cosmetic and psychometric surgical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of patients who underwent uro-oncologic surgery by three urologists at the University of Illinois Chicago from April to November 2021. Study participants completed a Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire 20 and 90 days post-procedure. The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire is a reliable measure of surgical scars that includes five subscales: Appearance, Symptoms, Consciousness, Satisfaction with Appearance, and Satisfaction with Symptoms. Higher scores represented worse reported outcomes. Results: On Postoperative Day 20, there were 77 responses (53 SP and 24 MP). Patients receiving SP procedures reported more favourable outcomes in terms of appearance, symptoms, consciousness, and pain medication. On Day 90, there were 37 responses (24 SP and 13 MP). Patients receiving SP procedures reported more favourable outcomes in terms of appearance. No significant differences were seen on Day 90 in terms of pain, medication, symptoms, consciousness, or satisfaction. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the superiority of the SP in patient reported cosmetic and pain outcomes on short- and long-term follow-up after uro-oncological surgical procedures. Symptomatic and cosmetic advantages are present at the 20 day follow-up, with better scar appearance being significant 90 days after surgery.

Indexed as

multiportpatient reported outcomesprospective studysingle portsurgical scars

Identifiers

PMID38179033
PMCPMC10764165

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.