Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39174843›Full record

ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2024

Robot-assisted vascular surgery: literature review, clinical applications, and future perspectives.

Balazs C Lengyel, Ponraj Chinnadurai, Stuart J Corr, Alan B Lumsden, Charudatta S Bavare

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Feasibility of a sutureless anastomotic technique in robot-assisted vascular surgery.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. The Fusion of Robotics and Imaging: A Vision of the Future.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025
    Review
  10. Robotic-Assisted Vascular Surgery: A Clinical Perspective.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

5 authors.

Balazs C LengyelDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6550 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. lengyel.balazs92@gmail.com.
Ponraj ChinnaduraiDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6550 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Stuart J CorrDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6550 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Alan B LumsdenDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6550 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Charudatta S BavareDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Houston Methodist Hospital, 6550 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although robot-assisted surgical procedures using the da Vinci robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) have been performed in more than 13 million procedures worldwide over the last two decades, the vascular surgical community has yet to fully embrace this approach (Intuitive Surgical Investor Presentation Q3 (2023) https://investor.intuitivesurgical.com/static-files/dd0f7e46-db67-4f10-90d9-d826df00554e . Accessed February 22, 2024). In the meantime, endovascular procedures revolutionized vascular care, serving as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgery. In the pursuit of a percutaneous approach, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and fewer perioperative complications, the long-term durability of open surgical vascular reconstruction has been compromised (in Lancet 365:2179-2186, 2005; Patel in Lancet 388:2366-2374, 2016; Wanhainen in Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 57:8-93, 2019). The underlying question is whether the robotic-assisted laparoscopic vascular surgical approaches could deliver the robustness and longevity of open vascular surgical reconstruction, but with a minimally invasive delivery system. In the meantime, other surgical specialties have embraced robot-assisted laparoscopic technology and mastered the essential vascular skillsets along with minimally invasive robotic surgery. For example, surgical procedures such as renal transplantation, lung transplantation, and portal vein reconstruction are routinely being performed with robotic assistance that includes major vascular anastomoses (Emerson in J Heart Lung Transplant 43:158-161, 2024; Fei in J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 9, 2023; Tzvetanov in Transplantation 106:479-488, 2022; Slagter in Int J Surg 99, 2022). Handling and dissection of major vascular structures come with the inherent risk of vascular injury, perhaps the most feared complication during such robotic procedures, possibly requiring emergent vascular surgical consultation. In this review article, we describe the impact of a minimally invasive, robotic approach covering the following topics: a brief history of robotic surgery, components and benefits of the robotic system as compared to laparoscopy, current literature on "vascular" applications of the robotic system, evolving training pathways and future perspectives.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresVascular Surgical ProceduresEndovascular ProceduresHumansLaparoscopyLaparoscopic surgeryRobotic-assisted laparoscopic vascular surgeryRobotic surgeryVascular roboticsVascular surgery

Identifiers

PMID39174843
PMCPMC11341614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.