Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40101281›Full record

ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2025

Haptic feedback in robotic endovascular neurosurgical intervention: A necessity or a commodity?

Gilbert Gravino

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Gilbert GravinoConsultant Neuroradiologist (Interventional and Diagnostics), The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2894-7098

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, both visual and haptic feedback have been regarded as elementary aspects of endovascular neurosurgical intervention. The literature acknowledges that the lack of haptic feedback and the reliance on visual feedback alone in robotic endovascular neurosurgical intervention (RENI) is a limitation. However, several operators who are at the forefront of applying this technology appear to have become quickly accustomed to visual feedback alone. Some have explained their initial scepticism, but upon using the technology they eventually saw the lack of haptic feedback as less of an obstacle and started to regard visual feedback alone as a feasible and safe means to perform procedures. Therefore, this begs the question as to whether haptic feedback is in effect a necessity or a commodity. In this commentary, several considerations are made, presenting arguments supporting the idea that haptic feedback may not be an absolute necessity, and their potential counterarguments. Such reflection and discussion on the topic of haptic feedback in RENI is timely and presently warranted to guide its research and development.

Indexed as

aneurysmneuroradiologyroboticsStroketechnology

Identifiers

PMID40101281
PMCPMC11920981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.