Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38327978›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2024

Current Expectations and Opinions on Single-port Robotic Surgery: A Survey Among European Experts by the SPARC Collaborative Group.

Francesco Ditonno, Leslie Claire Licari, Antonio Franco, Eugenio Bologna, Celeste Manfredi, Nicolas A Soputro, Roxana Ramos, Alessandro Antonelli, Ryan J Nelson, Mutahar Ahmed and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Early Single-Center Experience of DaVinciJournal of clinical medicine · 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

15 authors.

Francesco DitonnoDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Leslie Claire LicariDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Antonio FrancoDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Eugenio BolognaDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Celeste ManfrediDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Nicolas A SoputroDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Roxana RamosDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Alessandro AntonelliDepartment of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Ryan J NelsonDepartment of Urology, McLaren Macomb Hospital, Mount Clemens, MI, USA.
Mutahar AhmedDepartment of Urology, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Nutley, NJ, USA.
Micheal StifelmanDepartment of Urology, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Nutley, NJ, USA.
Ketan BadaniDepartment of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Jihad KaoukDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Simone CrivellaroDepartment of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Riccardo AutorinoDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-port (SP) robotic surgery is a relatively new technology that is expected to become available on the European market within a year. We investigated the current expectations of robotic surgery experts and opinion leaders practicing in Europe. A 17-item online questionnaire was sent to 120 participants identified as "experts" on the basis of their general contributions to the field of robotic surgery. Overall, 90 responses were registered, with a response rate of 75%. Italy (30%), France (15%), and the UK (12%) provided the most participants, who worked mainly in academic-either public (60%) or private (20%)-hospitals. Most respondents (79%) had no previous experience with "single site" surgery, and attendance at scientific meetings (79%) and perusal of the literature (65%) were the sources of SP knowledge most frequently reported. The perceived advantages of SP robotic surgery included lower invasiveness (61%), easier access to the retroperitoneal or extraperitoneal space (53%), better cosmetic results (44%), and lower postoperative pain (44%). The most "appealing" SP procedures were retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy via an anterior approach (43%) and transvesical simple prostatectomy (43%). Within the limitations of this type of analysis, our findings suggest high interest and a positive attitude towards SP technology overall. Patient summary: Technology for single-port (SP) robotic surgery, in which just one skin incision is made in the abdomen to perform the operation, will soon be available in Europe. We conducted a survey on SP surgery among European experts in urological robotic surgery. The results show that there is high interest in and a positive attitude to SP surgery. The SP approach could result in better cosmetic results and lower postoperative pain for patients.

Indexed as

Expert opinionRobot-assisted surgerySingle-port surgerySurvey

Identifiers

PMID38327978
PMCPMC10847014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.