ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robotic uterine transposition for fertility preservation in patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy: a narrative review of surgical evolution, technical strategies, and emerging evidence.
Review in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uterine transposition (UT) has emerged as a highly innovative fertility-preserving strategy for patients requiring pelvic radiotherapy. Unlike conventional approaches focused primarily on ovarian preservation, UT aims to protect both ovarian endocrine function and uterine integrity by temporarily relocating the uterus and adnexa outside the radiation field, followed by uterine repositioning after completion of oncologic treatment. While the feasibility of this procedure has been initially established through laparoscopic techniques, recent years have witnessed the introduction of robotic assistance, potentially offering advantages in surgical precision, visualization, and ergonomics during complex pelvic and upper abdominal dissection. This narrative review synthesizes the available evidence on robotic-assisted UT and contextualizes it within the previously published laparoscopic experience. The laparoscopic literature has defined patient selection criteria, operative principles, and early functional outcomes, demonstrating that UT can be safely integrated into multimodal oncologic treatment pathways. The emerging robotic experience, although limited to a small number of reported cases, confirms the technical feasibility of the procedure, with low perioperative outcomes and encouraging preservation of endocrine, reproductive and oncologic outcomes. Further evidence from prospective, multicenter experiences is required to define long-term outcomes and to clarify the role of robotic-assistance in this pioneering procedure.
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.