ArticleObesity surgery2024
Feasibility and Safety Study of the Use of a New Robot (Maestro™) for Laparoscopic Surgery.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Hugo™ RAS system in gynecologic robotic surgery: a systematic review of current applications.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass with the Maestro™ System: a Novel Collaborative Robotic Platform.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Integration of a collaborative robotic platform in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: safety, feasibility, and operative time variability.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical advantages of a new collaborative assistant robot (ANSUR surgical unit) in laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Safety and feasibility of solo surgery using a novel robotic platform: an IDEAL 2a development study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
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
backgroundIn laparoscopic surgery, telerobotic systems such as Da Vinci™ were developed, among other things, to give back exposure and vision control to the operating surgeon. However, new limitations such as the separation of the operating surgeon from the operating table, cost, and size were unveiled. A new device, Maestro™, appears promising in addressing these limitations. The current work evaluates the feasibility, safety, and surgeon satisfaction with the assistance provided by the Maestro System.
methodsNon-consecutive patients who were candidates for laparoscopic digestive surgery were enrolled in a descriptive prospective, monocentric study. Case selection was solely based on the availability of the device, but not on the patient's characteristics. Surgery was performed by a leading surgeon with the help of one less experienced surgeon. Feasibility was defined by the maintenance of the initial surgical plan. Safety was assessed by the absence of serious adverse events related to the device and surgeon satisfaction was evaluated by a questionnaire following the intervention.
resultsAll 50 procedures were completed without conversion in laparotomy and without adjustment of the surgical team. Four complications were recorded during the study; however, none related to the use of the Maestro System. In 92% of the cases, the surgeon was satisfied with the assistance provided by the Maestro System.
conclusionsIn standard elective digestive procedures by laparoscopy, the use of the Maestro System is feasible and safe. It is beneficial to the surgeon and operative room organization by limiting the size of the surgical team.
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.