ReviewSurgical endoscopy2025
Remote robotic surgery: implementing a technology 20 years in the making.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Remote robotic surgery: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Global research landscape, knowledge structure, and emerging frontiers of urological robotic telesurgery: a bibliometric and knowledge-mapping analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- A readiness framework for tele-robotic surgery deployment in rural hospitals.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Application of 5G technology in remote robotic surgery: a comprehensive assessment of system architecture, clinical benefits, and future challenges.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Pioneering telesurgery in gynecology: the first European case of total hysterectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Global trends and insights of telesurgery research: a bibliometric analysis of publications since the 21st century.Surgical endoscopy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remote robotic surgery represents a transformative and unique approach to surgical care, offering the potential to expand access to healthcare to underserved areas, improve patient outcomes, and enhance surgical technologies. However, it is not without significant challenges, including technical limitations, ethical concerns, and financial implications. These hurdles must be carefully addressed to ensure safe and equitable integration into mainstream healthcare. Following initial excitement over 20 years ago regarding its potential as a remote tool in arenas, such as combat zones, its mainstream adoption faced challenges in terms of technological infrastructure, regulatory compliance, and ethical considerations. With the widespread adoption of robotic surgery and improvements in both the technology and the communications infrastructure, the potential for remote robotic telesurgery is experiencing a resurgence. While surgery in austere environments is intriguing, this article aims to explore the roadmap for potentially integrating remote robotic surgery into mainstream healthcare, as well as the feasibility of remote robotic surgery in the current clinical climate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39994045What 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.