SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2024
Feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted surgical approach in median arcuate ligament syndrome-a systematic review.
Synthesis 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.
- A proposed technique for robotic port placement and arterial control of the femoral region for a peripheral arterial bypass with the Da Vinci SP system.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Approach to Median Arcuate Ligament Syndrome: A Single-Center Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Robotic-Assisted Vascular Surgery: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Feasibility study to evaluate the MMI Symani robotic system for microsurgical techniques in an in-vitro circulation model.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS) is rare syndrome and is diagnosis of exclusion. Though first robotic median arcuate ligament release (MALR) was described in 2007, there are only a few case reports (CR), case series (CS), and retrospective cohort studies (RCS) in the published literature. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted MALR (r-MALR). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (last search December 2023) for articles reporting r-MALR. All studies including CR, CS, RCS reporting technical feasibility (operating time and rate of conversions), safety (intra-operative complications, blood loss, post-operative complications), and outcome (length of stay [LoS]) were included (PROSPERO: CRD42024502792). A total of 23 studies (8-CR, 5-CS, 10-RCS) with total 290 patients were available in the literature. Except 1-RCS, all studies reported age and mean age for CR was 40.38 ± 17.7, 36.08 ± 15.12 for CS, 39.72 ± 7.35 years for RS; except 2-RCS, all studies reported gender distribution and there were 57 males and 214 females. Operating time: 3-CR, 4-CS, 9-RCS reported operating time, and mean time was 111 ± 54, 131.69 ± 7.51, 117.34 ± 35.03 min, respectively. Conversion rate: All studies reported data on conversion and only four (1.37%) cases were converted-one to laparoscopic approach, three to open approach (1-inadvertent celiac arteriotomy, 2-reasons not mentioned). Intraoperative complications: only 5-CR, 4-CS, and 9-RCS reported data on intra-operative complications, and there were only 6 complications (1.5%): 1-inadvertent celiac arteriotomy converted to open; 3-unnamed vascular injuries (2 managed robotically, 1 converted to open); 1-bleeding managed robotically; there were no other reported injuries. Estimated blood loss ranged from 5 to 30 ml. Post-operative complications: 5-CR, 4-CS, 8-RCS described post-operative complications in 21 (7%) patients. Twenty cases were grade I, one was grade IIIa, and all managed successfully. LoS stay: 2-CR, 4-CS, 10-RCS reported LoS and overall, it was 2 days. r-MALR is reasonable, technically feasible, safe, and has acceptable outcomes. In addition, robotic approach provided superior vision, improved dexterity, precise, and easy circumferential dissection.PROSPERO registration: The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024502792).
Indexed as
Identifiers
39122880What 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.