Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40458571›Full record

ArticleAsian journal of urology2025

Robotic urologic applications of the hinotori™ Surgical Robot System.

Shunsuke Miyamoto, Tomoya Hatayama, Hiroyuki Shikuma, Kazuma Yukihiro, Kyohsuke Iwane, Ryo Tasaka, Yuki Kohada, Takafumi Fukushima, Kenshiro Takemoto, Miki Naito and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Asian journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. MiDAS: A Multimodal Data Acquisition System and Dataset for Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

18 authors.

Shunsuke MiyamotoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Tomoya HatayamaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Hiroyuki ShikumaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kazuma YukihiroDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kyohsuke IwaneDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Ryo TasakaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Yuki KohadaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Takafumi FukushimaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kenshiro TakemotoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Miki NaitoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kohei KobatakeDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Yohei SekinoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Hiroyuki KitanoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kenichiro IkedaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Keisuke GotoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Akihiro GorikiDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Keisuke HiedaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Nobuyuki HinataDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess the safety and effectiveness of urological tumor surgeries using the hinotori™ Surgical Robot System (hinotori) in a real-world clinical setting. Methods: All surgeries including robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), robot-assisted radical nephrectomy (RARN), robot-assisted nephroureterectomy (RANU), robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RAA), and robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (RARC+ICUD) for urological tumors with the hinotori and da Vinci surgical system (da Vinci) from January 2022 to September 2023 were enrolled. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of surgeries using the hinotori compared with those using the da Vinci. Results: Robotic surgeries using the hinotori were performed in a total of 91 cases, comprising 42 cases of RARP, 18 cases of RAPN, six cases of RARN, 10 cases of RANU, 13 cases of RAA, and two cases of RARC+ICUD; no major intraoperative complications were observed in any of the cases using the hinotori; no major postoperative complications occurred in any of the cases; no case experienced an unrecoverable equipment error during surgery. Meanwhile, robotic surgeries using the da Vinci were performed in a total of 277 cases, comprising 126 cases of RARP, 94 cases of RAPN, 12 cases of RARN, 10 cases of RANU, 20 cases of RAA, and 15 cases of RARC+ICUD; major intraoperative complications occurred in two cases; major postoperative complications occurred in seven cases; seven cases required transfusion; one case underwent conversion to open surgery; during the study period, no case experienced an unrecoverable equipment error. Surgical outcomes for cases with the hinotori were comparable to those with the da Vinci. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the hinotori is a safe and feasible tool for robotic surgeries in the field of urology.

Indexed as

hinotori™ Surgical Robot SystemIntracorporeal urinary diversionRobot-assisted adrenalectomyRobot-assisted nephroureterectomyRobot-assisted partial nephrectomyRobot-assisted radical cystectomyRobot-assisted radical nephrectomyRobot-assisted radical prostatectomySurgical robot

Identifiers

PMID40458571
PMCPMC12126947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.