Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40272600›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025

Comparison of laparoscopic vs. robotic sentinel lymph node mapping and biopsy in  endometrial cancer.

Harrison Odgers, Angela Lin, Trevor Tejada-Berges

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07583329 (Comparison of Sentinel Lymph Node Applications in Endometrial Cancer Cases Performed With V-NOTES and Conventional Laparoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT07583329 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Sentinel Lymph Node Applications in Endometrial Cancer Cases Performed With V-NOTES and Conventional Laparoscopy: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorCukurova UniversityRan2026 to 2036Enrolled160ConditionsEndometrial Adenocarcinoma, Endometrial Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Harrison OdgersDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, 119-143 Missenden Road, Camperdown, Sydney, 2050, Australia. Harrison.odgers@health.nsw.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6770-9394
Angela LinDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, 119-143 Missenden Road, Camperdown, Sydney, 2050, Australia.
Trevor Tejada-BergesDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, 119-143 Missenden Road, Camperdown, Sydney, 2050, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We compare the success of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy between standard laparoscopy and robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) in patients with endometrial cancer. Patients with uterine epithelial tumour types undergoing staging surgery were identified from January 2019 to March 2023. Included patients underwent a total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and attempted bilateral SLN biopsy with indigocyanine green (ICG) dye, utilising either standard laparoscopy or RAL. 298 patients met the inclusion criteria. 211 (70.8%) had standard laparoscopy and 87 (29.2%) underwent RAL. The RAL cohort had significantly higher median body mass index (BMI) compared to standard laparoscopy (37 vs. 28 kg/m

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyAdultAgedFemaleHumansHysterectomyMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSentinel Lymph NodeEndometrial cancerGynaecologic OncologyMinimally invasive surgeryRobotic surgerySentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID40272600
PMCPMC12021943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.