ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Ideal suturing technique for robot-assisted microsurgical anastomoses.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Major Robotic Systems in Microanastomosis Procedures: A Systematic Review of Current Capabilities and Future Potential.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Hands-On Robotic Microsurgery: Robotic-Assisted Free Flap Reconstruction of the Upper Extremity.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The development of novel robotic devices specifically designed for open microsurgery leads to increasing applications in reconstructive procedures. While initial studies revealed improved precision and surgical ergonomics upon robotic assistance, surgical time was consistently observed to be increased. This study compares two robotic suturing techniques using the Symani Surgical System and RoboticScope in a preclinical setting, to further leverage the benefits of novel robotic devices in microsurgery. Six experienced microsurgeons performed three microvascular anastomoses with a "steady-thread" suturing technique and a "switch-thread" technique on 1.0-mm-diameter artificial silicone vessels. Time for anastomosis and participant's satisfaction with the techniques and robotic setup were recorded. Anastomosis quality and microsurgical skills were assessed using the Anastomosis Lapse Index and Structured Assessment of Microsurgery Skills. Lastly, technical error messages and thread ruptures were quantified. Knot tying was significantly faster and evaluated significantly better by participants using the steady-thread technique (4.11 ± 0.85 vs. 6.40 ± 1.83 min per anastomosis). Moreover, microsurgical skills were rated significantly better using this technique, while both techniques consistently led to high levels of anastomosis quality (2.61 ± 1.21 vs. 3.0 ± 1.29 errors per anastomosis). In contrast, the switch-thread technique was associated with more technical error messages in total (14 vs. 12) and twice as many unintended thread ruptures per anastomosis (1.0 ± 0.88 vs. 0.5 ± 0.69). This study provides evidence for the enhanced performance of a steady-thread suturing technique, which is suggested to be applied upon robot-assisted microsurgical procedures for optimized efficiency.
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.