ArticleCureus2025
Comparison of Surgical Outcomes Between the hinotori™ and da Vinci® Robotic Systems in Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Beyond Da Vinci: Comparative Review of Next-Generation Robotic Platforms in Urologic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
Objective This study aimed to assess whether the hinotori™ surgical system (Medicaroid Corporation, Kobe, Japan), during its early clinical adoption, could achieve perioperative outcomes in robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) comparable to those of the established da Vinci® system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Materials and methods This single-center retrospective study included 23 patients who underwent RASC between September 2023 and December 2024. Eleven patients underwent surgery with the hinotori™ system (h-RASC), and twelve with the da Vinci® system (d-RASC). Operative time, console time, and stepwise procedural durations were evaluated. Results Patient characteristics were comparable between groups. Although console time showed no significant difference, operative time tended to be longer in the h-RASC group (275 vs. 242 minutes; p = 0.056), without reaching statistical significance. The time from robot roll-in to console start (16 vs. 7 minutes; p = 0.004) and posterior mesh fixation (16 vs. 12 minutes; p = 0.001) was significantly longer with the hinotori™ system. Other perioperative outcomes were similar. Conclusion RASC using the hinotori™ system produced comparable perioperative outcomes to those of the da Vinci® system, although some procedural delays were observed during the initial implementation period.
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.