ArticleCureus2024
Utility of a 3 mm Bipolar Instrument in Laparoscopic Renal Surgery Using the Senhance Robotic System.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Comparison of the efficacy of different models of KangDuo surgical robots and the da Vinci surgical robots in partial nephrectomy of RENAL score ≤9 tumors.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Article
- An Arthroscopic Robotic System for Meniscoplasty with Autonomous Operation Ability.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
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
We report our initial experience and the utility of 3 mm bipolar forceps in laparoscopic renal surgery using the Senhance robotic system. We performed laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma in two patients: an 80-year-old female with a left renal pelvic tumor and an 80-year-old male with a right ureteral tumor. Both surgeries were successfully completed without conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy. The console times for the procedures were 101 and 108 minutes, with estimated blood losses of 5 and 50 milliliters, respectively. The postoperative courses were uncomplicated, with histopathological examinations confirming high-grade urothelial carcinoma with negative surgical margins in both patients. The 3 mm Maryland bipolar instrument was able to grasp membranes with sufficient gentleness and precision. The relatively narrow diameter of the shaft posed a challenge in terms of shaft strength; however, it did not deflect even when it was used to lift the kidney, indicating sufficient robustness. When utilized in the cutting mode, the incision capacity of the 3 mm Maryland bipolar instrument was higher than that of the 5 mm instrument, which allowed for expedient and precise incision. Since only the tissue held by the forceps was incised, it was possible to perform a safe incision even in areas near blood vessels and other organs. Although the tip of the 3 mm Maryland instrument is more sharply pointed than that of the 5 mm instrument, no tissue damage was observed even when the 3 mm instrument was used for blunt dissection. Our initial results suggest that the 3 mm Maryland bipolar instrument is efficacious for performing laparoscopic renal surgery. The instrument may be suitable for a range of surgical procedures in laparoscopic renal surgery using the Senhance system. Further studies are necessary to establish the role and effectiveness of this instrument in broader clinical applications.
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.