ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Innovative classification system for enlarged uterus in laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy with complications and pain scores.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy for complex hysterectomy: a retrospective study.Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of robot-assisted hysterectomy (RAH) with those of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH) for large uteri via a novel classification system. Ambispective analysis of 237 cases was performed, comprising 90 retrospectively reviewed cases and 147 prospectively enrolled cases. Patients were categorized into two main groups based on surgical procedure (RAH and CLH) and three subgroups each (type 1 (T1), type 2 (T2), and type3 (T3)) based on uterine size. Key outcomes, including the operative time and perioperative complications, were analyzed. Quality of life was assessed using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions and the Female Sexual Function Index questionnaires. The surgeon's learning curve was evaluated using surgical data. Among 237 patients, 47.3% underwent RAH and 52.7% underwent CLH. RAH was preferred for larger uteri (T3: 888.8 ± 136 g) vs. CLH (T3: 778.8 ± 83.7 g, P < 0.001). However, compared with CLH, RAH had a longer operative time, lower blood loss (RAH, T3: 107.8 ± 69.8 mL vs. CLH, T3 309 ± 248.4 mL, P < 0.001), better hemoglobin recovery, and shorter hospitalization (P < 0.05). Most of the complications (ureteric injury, laparotomy conversion, gastrointestinal injuries) occurred only in the CLH group, whereas vascular and bladder injuries were observed in both groups. Pain scores normalized by the 4th week, patient satisfaction was greater in RAH group (RAH 75.3% vs CLH 72.3%), and sexual function was comparable. Surgeon's experience improved over time, especially for large uteri. RAH is associated with more favorable outcomes than CLH, especially with regard to larger uteri (T3).
Indexed as
Identifiers
40295457What 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.