ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Robotic
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimSurgery is the preferred treatment modality for endometrial cancer. In recent years, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become increasingly popular, and in Japan, robotic surgery has been covered by national insurance in addition to laparoscopic surgery for apparent stage IA cases since 2018. We conducted a comparative analysis of laparoscopic and robotic surgeries, including pelvic lymphadenectomy for stage IA endometrial cancer, with the aim of evaluating the efficacy of robotic surgery. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted for patients who underwent MIS pelvic lymphadenectomy between January 2018 and December 2023. Sixty-nine patients who underwent robotic surgery and 29 who underwent laparoscopic surgery were included in the study. All the patients underwent total hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection, with preoperative diagnosis of stage 1A and G1-G2 endometrial cancer.
resultsOperative time was longer in the robotic group (median=316
conclusionThis retrospective analysis suggests that robotic surgery is a feasible and safe procedure for total hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with preoperative diagnosis of stage IA and G1-G2 endometrial cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.