ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Specimen extraction techniques utilized in minimally invasive surgery for uterine cancer and an enlarged uterus: a quality assurance study.
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. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the techniques and complications of enlarged uterine extraction during minimally invasive surgery for uterine malignancy. The electronic medical record was queried for patients with uterine malignancy and enlarged uterus (≥ 250 g) who underwent primary hysterectomy with laparoscopic or robotic approach. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. All patients with presumed uterine confined endometrial cancer who underwent upfront surgical management with minimally invasive hysterectomy and had uterine specimen weight ≥ 250 g were included. Seventy-eight patients met inclusion criteria. Mean specimen weight and mean operating time differed by extraction technique: intact vaginal extraction 307 g, 163 min; vaginal removal in specimen bag 337 g, 214 min; incidental vaginal morcellation 321 g, 178 min; vaginal morcellation in specimen bag 361 g, 212 min; and small laparotomy 677 g, 237 min. Specimens that required removal with small laparotomy incisions were larger in weight (p = < .001) and had increased operative time (p = < .001). Adjuvant treatment was given to 52.6% (41/78) of patients; 36.6% (15/41) received chemotherapy and 63.4% (26/41) received radiation. Rates of adjuvant radiation differed among extraction techniques (p = .018). Recurrence rates (n = 8) and patient death (n = 6) were not associated with extraction techniques (p = .408 and p = .537, respectively). Adjuvant radiation rates were statistically different among extraction techniques. Specimens removed by small laparotomy were significantly larger and required greater operative time. This study demonstrated that minimally invasive surgery was feasible in patients with uterine malignancy and an enlarged uterus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40926147What 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.