ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Robotic-assisted surgery for gynecological indications in children and adolescents: European multicenter report.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic-assisted surgery as an enabling technology for ovarian-sparing management in pediatric benign ovarian tumours: a comparative study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology (IPSO) Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) Guidelines.Ecancermedicalscience · 2026Article
- Fluorescence-Guided Surgery in Pediatric Oncology: Current Practice and Future Directions.Cancers · 2025Review
- Seven years of pediatric robotic-assisted surgery: insights from 105 procedures.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Management of Ovarian Cysts, Masses, and Their Complications in Fetuses, Infants, Children, and Adolescents.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Ovarian neoplasms - the role of minimally invasive surgery.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
- Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence technology in pediatric robotic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is increasingly adopted in the pediatric population. This retrospective multicenter study aimed to report application of RAS for gynecological indications in pediatric patients. The medical records of all girls with gynecological pathology, operated in 4 different institutions over a 3-year period, were retrospectively collected. Robot docking time, total operative time, length of stay (LOS), requirement time of pain medication, complication rate, conversion rate, and pathology were analyzed. Twenty-three girls, with median age of 12.3 years (range 0.6-17.8) and median weight of 47.2 kg (range 9-73), received the following RAS procedures: ovarian cystectomy for ovarian cyst/mass (n = 10), salpingo-oophorectomy for ovarian complex mass (n = 6), bilateral gonadectomy for Turner syndrome SRY + (n = 1), salpingectomy for fallopian tube lesion (n = 1), paratubal cyst excision (n = 1), Gartner cyst excision (n = 1), paravaginal ganglioneuroma resection (n = 1), fistula closure in urogenital sinus (n = 1), and vaginoplasty using ileal flap in cloaca malformation (n = 1). Median operative time was 144.9 min (range 64-360), and median docking time was 17.3 min (range 7-50). Conversion to open or laparoscopy was not necessary in any case. Median LOS was 2.1 days (range 1-7), and median analgesic requirement was 2.2 days (range 1-6). One patient (4.3%) needed redo-surgery for recurrent Gartner cyst (Clavien 3b). This preliminary experience showed that RAS is safe and feasible for surgical treatment of gynecological pathology in pediatric patients, although no conclusive data are available to confirm its superiority over traditional laparoscopy. Randomized, prospective, comparative studies are needed to identify the gold standard approach for such indication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.