ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Surgical gestures to evaluate apical dissection of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Application of artificial intelligence for surgical skill assessment and quality control in minimally invasive surgery: progress, problems and prospect].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2026Review
- End to end AI system for surgical gesture sequence recognition and clinical outcome prediction.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Standardization of surgical gesture taxonomy: a SAGES Delphi consensus study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- AI model predicts patient outcomes from surgical gestures and provides insights into explainability.npj digital surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previously, our group established a surgical gesture classification system that deconstructs robotic tissue dissection into basic surgical maneuvers. Here, we evaluate gestures by correlating the metric with surgeon experience and technical skill assessment scores in the apical dissection (AD) of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Additionally, we explore the association between AD performance and early continence recovery following RARP. 78 AD surgical videos from 2016 to 2018 across two international institutions were included. Surgeons were grouped by median robotic caseload (range 80-5,800 cases): less experienced group (< 475 cases) and more experienced (≥ 475 cases). Videos were decoded with gestures and assessed using Dissection Assessment for Robotic Technique (DART). Statistical findings revealed more experienced surgeons (n = 10) used greater proportions of cold cut (p = 0.008) and smaller proportions of peel/push, spread, and two-hand spread (p < 0.05) than less experienced surgeons (n = 10). Correlations between gestures and technical skills assessments ranged from - 0.397 to 0.316 (p < 0.05). Surgeons utilizing more retraction gestures had lower total DART scores (p < 0.01), suggesting less dissection proficiency. Those who used more gestures and spent more time per gesture had lower efficiency scores (p < 0.01). More coagulation and hook gestures were found in cases of patients with continence recovery compared to those with ongoing incontinence (p < 0.04). Gestures performed during AD vary based on surgeon experience level and patient continence recovery duration. Significant correlations were demonstrated between gestures and dissection technical skills. Gestures can serve as a novel method to objectively evaluate dissection performance and anticipate outcomes.
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.