Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38856924›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2024

New horizons in gynecological surgery: first-year experience with HUGO™ robotic-assisted surgery system at two tertiary referral robotic centers.

Margarita Afonina, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Giorgia Gaia, Marco Paciotti, Giovanni Leva, Anna Maria Marconi, Koen Traen, Alexandre Mottrie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Robotic-assisted hysterectomy using DEXTERFacts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2025
    Article
  6. Optimizing arm placement in the HugoUpdates in surgery · 2025
    Article
  7. 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.

Margarita Afonina *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Paolo Hospital Medical School, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. afoninamargarita@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7126-3866
Claudia Collà Ruvolo *ORSI Academy, Ghent, Belgium.
Giorgia GaiaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Paolo Hospital Medical School, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Marco PaciottiORSI Academy, Ghent, Belgium.
Giovanni LevaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Paolo Hospital Medical School, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Anna Maria MarconiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Paolo Hospital Medical School, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Koen TraenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium.
Alexandre MottrieORSI Academy, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The HUGO™ robotic-assisted surgery system (RAS, Medtronic, CA) consists of a 3D open console, four independent carts, and an integrated laparoscopic and robotic tower. Approved in 2021, it represents a novel alternative platform for robotic procedures. The aim of our study is to report the first-year experience with this system for gynecological procedures at two tertiary referral robotic centers. We prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed data from patients underwent gynecological robot-assisted surgery with the HUGO™ RAS, at San Paolo University Hospital (Milan, Italy), and Onze Lieve Vrouw (OLV) Hospital (Aalst, Belgium), March 2022-April 2023. Demographic characteristics, intraoperative settings, and perioperative outcomes were investigated. A total of 32 procedures were performed: 20 (62.5%) hysterectomies, 7 (21.9%) adnexal surgeries, and 5 (15.6%) pelvic floor reconstructive surgeries. In 2022 and 2023, 13 (40.6%) and 19 (59.4%) procedures were carried out, respectively. The median docking time was 8 min (IQR 5.8-11.5). The median console and skin-to-skin time was 52.5 min (IQR 33.8-94.2) and 108.5 min (IQR 81.5-157.2), respectively. No intraoperative complications occurred. Two conversions to laparoscopy managed without any additional complications were needed. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first global series of gynecological procedures performed with the HUGO™ RAS. Our preliminary findings showed the system's feasibility reporting promising results. The observed upward trend in the total number of procedures during the analyzed period is encouraging. Further studies are needed to assess a standardized method in the gynecological field with the novel platform.

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresRobotic Surgical ProceduresTertiary Care CentersAdultAgedBelgiumFemaleHumansHysterectomyItalyLaparoscopyMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesGynecological proceduresHUGO RAS systemMinimally invasive surgeryRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID38856924
PMCPMC11455813

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.