Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39154016›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2024

Emergency robotic surgery: the experience of a single center and review of the literature.

Graziano Ceccarelli, Fausto Catena, Pasquale Avella, Brian Wca Tian, Fabio Rondelli, Germano Guerra, Michele De Rosa, Aldo Rocca

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. An Emergency Robotic Programme for Acute Complicated Diverticulitis: A Tertiary Centre Experience.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
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.

Graziano CeccarelliDepartment of General Surgery, "San Giovanni Battista" Hospital, USL Umbria 2, Foligno, Perugia, Italy.
Fausto CatenaDivision of General Surgery, Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy.
Pasquale AvellaDepartment of General Surgery and Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pineta Grande Hospital, Castel Volturno, Caserta, Italy. avella.p@libero.it.
Brian Wca TianDepartment of General Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Fabio RondelliDepartment of General Surgery, "San Giovanni Battista" Hospital, USL Umbria 2, Foligno, Perugia, Italy.
Germano GuerraDepartment of Medicine and Health Science "V. Tiberio", University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy.
Michele De RosaDepartment of General Surgery, "San Giovanni Battista" Hospital, USL Umbria 2, Foligno, Perugia, Italy.
Aldo RoccaDepartment of General Surgery and Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pineta Grande Hospital, Castel Volturno, Caserta, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundsLaparoscopic surgery is widely used in abdominal emergency surgery (AES), and the possibility of extending this approach to the more recent robotic surgery (RS) arouses great interest. The slow diffusion of robotic technology mainly due to high costs and the longer RS operative time when compared to laparoscopy may represent disincentives, especially in AES. This study aims to report our experience in the use of RS in AES assessing its safety and feasibility, with particular focus on intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rate, and surgical learning curve. Our data were also compared to other experiences though an extensive literature review.

methodsWe retrospectively analysed a single surgeon series of the last 10 years. From January 2014 to December 2023, 36 patients underwent urgent or emergency RS. The robotic devices used were Da Vinci Si (15 cases) and Xi (21 cases).

results36 (4.3%) out of 834 robotic procedures were included in our analysis: 20 (56.56%) females. The mean age was 63 years and 30% of patients were ≥ 70 years. 2 (5.55%) procedures were performed at night. No conversions to open were reported in this series. According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, 2 (5.5%) major complications were collected. Intraoperative and 30-day mortality were 0%.

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that RS may be a useful and reliable approach also to AES and intraoperative laparoscopic complications when performed in selected hemodynamically stable patients in very well-trained robotic centers. The technology may increase the minimally invasive use and conversion rate in emergent settings in a completely robotic or hybrid approach.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedEmergenciesFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLearning CurveMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesAbdominal emergency surgeryComplicated diverticulitisEmergency settingLearning curveMinimally invasive surgeryUrgent robotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID39154016
PMCPMC11330055

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.