ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Comparison of Surgical Times Between Manual and Robot-Assisted Epiretinal Membrane Peeling.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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.
- Toward autonomous robotic-assisted and microrobotic surgery.Science advances · 2026Review
- Comparison of the learning curves of the osteotomy guide robot and guide plate-based robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Bimanual Manipulation of Steady-Hand Eye Robots with Adaptive Sclera Force Control: Cooperative vs. Teleoperation Strategies.IEEE transactions on human-machine systems · 2025Article
- Real-Time Integration of Optical Coherence Tomography Thickness Map Overlays for Enhanced Visualization in Epiretinal Membrane Surgery: A Pilot Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Epiretinal membranes (ERM) pose a common challenge in vitreoretinal pathology, often causing vision impairment in older adults. The Preceyes Surgical System (PSS) supports the surgical removal of ERM through robot-assisted membrane peeling (RA-MP). This study compares surgical times and iatrogenic hemorrhages between manual membrane peeling (MMP) and RA-MP using PSS. Methods: Nine patients underwent RA-MP with PSS, whereas 16 patients (18 eyes) underwent MMP for comparative analysis. Surgical durations were categorized into RA-MP, manual forceps utilization in PSS surgeries (mRA-MP), and traditional MMP. Cumulative manual manipulation duration (cMMP), instrument grasps, and intraoperative hemorrhages were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: RA-MP showed significantly longer peeling times compared to MMP (P < 0.001). Flap initiation grasps were similar between methods (P = 0.86), RA-MP demonstrated a significant reduction in peeling grasps (P = 0.01) and mean grasps per minute (P < 0.001). Although RA-MP resulted in fewer hemorrhages, the difference did not reach statistical significance relative to MMP (P = 0.08). Discussion: Although RA-MP tended to extend surgical time, it offered advantages in reducing tissue trauma and intraoperative hemorrhages. Further research is needed to explore the learning curve for novice surgeons and evaluate the safety profile of RA-MP. Translational Relevance: RA-MP may offer potential advantages over manual surgery, particularly in terms of reduced tissue trauma and intraoperative hemorrhages. Despite its longer duration compared with manual techniques, RA-MP may lead to fewer grasping maneuvers and lower rates of hemorrhages, thereby enhancing the safety and precision of vitreoretinal surgeries.
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.