ArticleInternational journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology2024
Transoral robotic surgery for pediatric upper airway pathology: An institutional update.
Article in International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 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.
- Robot-assisted excision of thyroglossal duct cyst: a scoping review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Current Applications and Outcomes of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Upper Airway and Neck Procedures: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Robotic microsurgery for pediatric peripheral nerve surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveProvide an update on our institution's experience with utilizing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in pediatric airway surgery and compare these results to surgery by traditional methods.
methodsPediatric patients who underwent TORS for treatment of upper airway pathology between 2010 and 2021 at our institution were retrospectively identified and compared to patients with the same or similar pathology who underwent a traditional (open or endoscopic) surgical approach over the same time period. Outcomes of interest included patient demographics, operative times, adverse events, hospital length of stay (LOS), and modified barium swallow (MBSS) results.
resultsForty children (19M, 21F) underwent 46 TORS procedures. Mean age was 6.4 years (range: 6 days-17 years). Most commonly treated pathology included: laryngeal clefts (LC) (n = 18), lymphatic malformations (n = 9), and base of tongue masses (n = 7). Surgical time was decreased in traditional type I LC repairs (mean: 111 vs 149 min, P = 0.04) and lymphatic malformation excisions (59 vs 120 min, p = 0.005). Hospital LOS was increased in TORS type I LC repairs (2.6 vs 1.2 days, P = 0.04). Adverse event rate was similar between TORS and traditional cohorts (17 % vs 16 % cases, P = 0.9). Postoperative MBSS results were improved for TORS type I LC repairs at 6 months (70 % vs 33 %, P = 0.09) and 12 months (82 % vs 43 %, P = 0.05).
conclusionsPediatric TORS is practical and safe and has comparable outcomes to traditional surgery. Robotic-assisted LC repair displayed improved postoperative swallow results versus traditional approaches and may be particularly useful in recurrent cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.