SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
KangDuo system versus da Vinci system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on prospective studies.
Synthesis 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The da Vinci robotic platform, as the earliest operative platform implemented in routine clinical use, has been employed for various complex surgical conditions owing to its precision in manipulation. However, its prohibitive costs have restricted widespread adoption in certain regions. Consequently, China's domestically developed KangDuo robotic surgical platform was developed to address this need. Currently, comparative studies on perioperative outcomes between these two platforms for performing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) remain scarce. This meta-analysis aims to systematically compare perioperative outcomes among these robotic platforms. A structured search of the literature was undertaken across several principal online databases-such as PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and SpringerLink-to locate prospective investigations comparing K-RARP with D-RARP published before August 1, 2025. The comparative outcomes across the two robotic systems consisted of total operating time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, length of hospitalization, urinary continence recovery, post-operative complications, and positive surgical margin rates. This quantitative synthesis included four comparative studies encompassing an aggregate of 188 participants. The results revealed no significant differences in PSM rates (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55-2.04; p = 0.86), estimated intraoperative blood loss (WMD - 1.04 ml, 95% CI - 21.72 to 19.63; p = 0.92), length of hospitalization (WMD - 0.32 days, 95% CI - 1.33 to 0.70; p = 0.54), urinary continence (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50-1.83; p = 0.90), when contrasting K-RARP with D-RARP. Moreover, no meaningful differences were detected in the incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade I complications (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.33-3.89; p = 0.84), grade II complications (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.39-3.18; p = 0.84), or overall complication incidence (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.59-2.76; p = 0.53). However, for K-RARP, operative duration was significantly longer (WMD 41.34 min, 95% CI 22.42-60.26; p < 0.05). As the inaugural comparative assessment of perioperative outcomes between KangDuo and da Vinci robotic systems, this study demonstrated that while K-RARP required significantly longer operative times, it achieved comparable outcomes to D-RARP in EBL, positive surgical margin rate, hospital stay, continence, and complication rates. This evidence positions the KangDuo platform as a viable future option for localized prostate cancer management. However, this conclusion remains preliminary and exploratory, and will need to be confirmed through large-scale, multicenter, multi-regional randomized controlled trials combined with long-term follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41075042What 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.