ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
A simple technique to improve docking time in robotic surgery.
Article 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative outcomes of da Vinci SP versus da Vinci Xi platforms in robotic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic Cholecystectomy: Outcomes, Safety, and Value in the Era of Advanced Technology.Journal of surgery and research · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery in medical tourism: a retrospective descriptive study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
- Comment on "Impact of non-surgical OR time on efficiency and costs with Hugo™ RAS".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Standard operating procedures and learning curve analysis for surgical assistants in robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The docking process is a crucial step in robotic surgery, which determines the technical capability of moving the robotic arms during surgery and affects the performance of surgery. Robotic companies, therefore, provide setup guides recommending the trocar placement, arm carts, and operating table positioning for each procedure or body quadrant, to facilitate this process. This process takes time and although improves with experience, reported docking times range from 4 to 29 min. The final step of docking the robot is sometimes challenging and includes the insertion of the robotic instruments into the surgical field which involve patient safety. We implemented a simple new technique for safe insertion of robotic instruments and overcome the challenge of manipulating the camera arm for visualizing the trocars and advancing of the robotic instruments into the surgical field. This technique utilizes simple laparoscopic skills of laparoscopic instrument insertion. Docking times were recorded in ten consecutive patients undergoing robotic surgeries with the Hugo RAS™ and compared to our prospectively collected data registry prior to this technique. The new technique reduced the average docking time by 3.5 min and resulted in improvement of 45% in docking time. Integrating trivial laparoscopic skills into the docking process may simplify and reduce the docking time in robotic surgery.
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.