ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2025
Comparing approaches to benign hysterectomy using conventional multi-port and newer single-port robots: a propensity score matching analysis of surgical outcomes and literature review.
Review 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 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of robotic single-site hysterectomy versus robotic multi-port hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2026Pooled it
- Emerging robotic platforms in gynecologic surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- [Applying Robot-Assisted Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecology: Technological Paradigm Innovations and Clinical Advances].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2026Review
- Comparative analysis of nerve-sparing modified radical hysterectomy for deep endometriosis using the da Vinci SP versus Xi systems.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of surgical outcomes between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy for stage IV endometriosis: A propensity score-matched analysis and review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Single-port robotic surgery in gynecology: first experience in German-speaking countries using the Da Vinci SP system in benign andneoplastic diseases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluating the learning curve in robot-assisted laparoscopic total hysterectomy: single-port versus multi-port Da Vinci platforms.Journal of robotic 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the surgical outcomes of robot-assisted hysterectomy (RAH) for benign diseases using da Vinci SP (SP) and da Vinci Xi (Xi). A retrospective study with propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. An urban general hospital in Japan. 346 patients who underwent RAH at a single institution between May 2023 and April 2024. A 1:1 PSM analysis was performed using age, body mass index, number of previous deliveries, history of abdominal surgery, uterine weight, and severe endometriosis as covariates. Variables extracted for analysis included operative time, docking time, console time, estimated blood loss (EBL), hemoglobin drop, postoperative hospital stay, major intraoperative complication rates, and postoperative complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ Grade 3), conversion to laparotomy, and blood transfusion requirements. After PSM, 262 patients (131 in each group) were included in this study. The median (range) of operative time, docking time, console time, EBL, and postoperative hospital stay were 94 (39-191) vs. 77 (33-194) min (p < 0.001), 2 (1-8) vs. 2 (1-6) min (p=0.088), 66 (27-178) vs. 62 (25-144) min (p=0.003), 5 (5-650) vs. 5 (5-350) mL (p=0.394), and 4 (3-15) vs. 4 (3-9) days (p=0.688), respectively, for SP and Xi groups. No major intraoperative complications, blood transfusions, or conversions to laparotomy were observed in either group. Postoperative complications occurred in 3.1% and 1.5% of patients of SP and Xi groups, respectively (p=0.684). The learning curve for RAH using SP indicated proficiency after eight cases. SP can be a safe alternative robotic platform to Xi for RAH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40551078What 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.