ReviewSurgical endoscopy2024
Upcoming multi-visceral robotic surgery systems: a SAGES review.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Beyond da Vinci: a systematic review of next-generation multiport robotic platforms in pediatric surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Assessing effectiveness and skill transferability in multi-platform simulated training for robotic surgical skills: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the Toumai MT‑1000 for urologic surgery: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis with remote and on-site experiences.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Perioperative outcomes of the SHURUI single-port robotic system in urologic surgery: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- The use of robotic single site system in pediatric surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Pseudo-publication bias in robotic surgery: structural mapping of narrative inertia.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- White paper: robotic cholecystectomy-new technology but safe principles still apply.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Robotic surgery undergraduate module: first formal curricular integration.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- White paper on effective preacquisition evaluation of soft tissue robotic surgery platforms for healthcare institutions.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Critical analysis on the assessment of ergonomics in robotic surgery: A scoping review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Safety and feasibility of solo surgery using a novel robotic platform: an IDEAL 2a development study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- [Advances in the application of transoral robotic surgery].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025Review
- Robotic-Assisted Vascular Surgery: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of non-surgical OR time on efficiency and costs with Hugo™ RAS.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- SAGES tool for assessing robotic surgery systems (STARSS).Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety assessment of the AGIBOTSurgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection for Ductal Adenocarcinoma, Updates, Trends, and Future Considerations.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- Subjective workload in operating room team members during robotic hernia procedures.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection-Past, Present, and Future.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- The role of weight management in sleep disordered breathing.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic surgical procedures continue to increase both in the United States (US) and worldwide. Several novel robotic surgical platforms are under development or undergoing regulatory approval. This review explores robotic platforms that are expected to reach US consumers within the next 2-3 years.
methodsThe SAGES Robotic Platforms Working Group identified robotic surgery platforms in various stages of development and selected multi-visceral systems nearing or completing the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. We outline key system components including architecture, unique features, development status, regulatory approval, and expected markets.
resultsWe identified twenty robotic platforms that met our selection criteria. Ten companies were based in North America, and ten were based in Europe or Asia. Each system is described in detail and key features are summarized in table form for easy comparison.
conclusionThe emergence of novel robotic surgical platforms represents an important evolution in the growth of minimally invasive surgery. Increased competition has the potential to bring value to surgical patients by stimulating innovation and driving down cost. The impact of these platforms remains to be determined, but the continued growth of robotic surgery seems to be all but assured.
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.