ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2024
Is implementation of robotic-assisted procedures in acute care general surgery cost-effective?
Review 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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Costs of robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a wireless intelligent endoscopic system versus a conventional wired system: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2026Trial
- Robot-assisted cholecystectomies take less time to perform than laparoscopy in the urgent setting: a single-centered study evaluating elective and urgent cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in emergency surgery: a scoping review within the artificial intelligence in emergency and trauma surgery (ARIES) project.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive versus open surgery for colonic diverticular disease: a nationwide analysis of German hospital data.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Optimizing the role of scrub nurses during robotic surgery console time.Surgery open science · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past 2 decades, the use and importance of robotic surgery in minimally invasive surgery has increased. Across various surgical specialties, robotic technology has gained popularity through its use of 3D visualization, optimal ergonomic positioning, and precise instrument manipulation. This growing interest has also been seen in acute care surgery, where laparoscopic procedures are used more frequently. Despite the growing popularity of robotic surgery in the acute care surgical realm, there is very little research on the utility of robotics regarding its effects on health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. The current literature indicates some value in utilizing robotic technology in specific urgent procedures, such as cholecystectomies and incarcerated hernia repairs; however, the high cost of robotic surgery was found to be a potential barrier to its widespread use in acute care surgery. This narrative literature review aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in surgical procedures that are often done in urgent settings: cholecystectomies, inguinal hernia repair, ventral hernia repair, and appendectomies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38801638What 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.