ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic assisted versus conventional laparoscopic ovarian suture reapproximation in ovarian cystectomy of ovarian endometriomas in preserving ovarian reserve.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to introduce and evaluate a novel suturing technique for treating ovarian endometriomas (OMA) using robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL), termed the Reapproximation of Ovarian Stroma (ROS) method. The primary focus is to assess the efficacy of ROS-RAL in treating OMA and preserving ovarian reserve, as measured by anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels, compared to conventional laparoscopy (CL). In this retrospective study, we evaluated 154 patients who underwent OMA resection via either CL or RAL at Jeonbuk National University Hospital in Korea between February 1, 2017, to December 31, 2023. Among the participants, 85 patients received CL using conventional ovarian surgery, while 69 patients received ROS-RAL surgery. AMH levels were measured preoperatively and at postoperative intervals of 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months to determine the rate of AMH decline. The incidence of diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) was assessed to evaluate the impact on ovarian function over time. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with decreased ovarian reserve following OMA surgery. The ROS-RAL group exhibited higher AMH levels at postoperative months 1, 12, and 36 compared to the CL group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the rate of AMH decline at all postoperative time points was significantly lower in the ROS-RAL group (p < 0.05). At 36 months postoperatively, the incidence of DOR was also notably lower in the ROS-RAL group than in the CL group (27.54% vs. 44.71%, p = 0.028). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that ROS-RAL (OR: 0.207, 95% CI: 0.068–0.561, p = 0.003), higher preoperative AMH levels (OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.29–0.59, p < 0.001), unilateral cysts (OR: 3.36, 95% CI: 1.24–9.74, p = 0.020), and younger age (OR: −0.12, 95% CI: −0.16 to −0.08, p < 0.001) were found as protective factors for postoperative ovarian reserve function. Additionally, the postoperative recurrence rate in the CL group was 5.88%, while no recurrence cases were observed in the RAL group. This study demonstrates that the novel ROS-RAL surgery offers significant advantages in treating OMA and preserving ovarian function postoperatively in patients with OMA. Future research should incorporate larger sample sizes and evaluate the influence of surgical expertise and refinement in technique to substantiate and expand upon these results, ultimately contributing to optimized treatment strategies for OMA.
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.