ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Comparative analysis of nerve-sparing modified radical hysterectomy for deep endometriosis using the da Vinci SP versus Xi systems.
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. 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.
- Comparative outcomes of robotic single-port vNOTES versus robotic-Xi assisted single-incision transumbilical surgery for hysterectomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared surgical approaches and perioperative outcomes of nerve-sparing modified radical hysterectomy (NSmRH) for deep endometriosis (DE) using the da Vinci SP and Xi systems. This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted NSmRH for DE at a single tertiary referral center between March 2020 and October 2025. Disease severity was evaluated using the revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) and #Enzian classifications, and perioperative outcomes—including operative time (OT), console time (CT), docking time (DT), estimated blood loss (EBL), and complications—were compared. The analysis included 100 patients: 32 in the SP group and 68 in the Xi group. Advanced disease was prevalent in both cohorts, with rASRM stage IV observed in 72% of the SP group and 70% of the Xi group. The distribution of #Enzian classifications was comparable between groups. Median OT and CT did not differ significantly between groups (OT: 159 [123–196] vs. 144 [122–164] min, p = 0.16; and CT: 144 [101–180] vs. 130 [108–153] min, p = 0.22), whereas DT was shorter in the SP group (1.8–2.0 vs. 2.0–3.0 min, p = 0.0036). EBL was significantly lower in the SP group (5 vs. 15 mL; p = 0.0015). No intraoperative injuries, severe postoperative complications, or voiding dysfunction were observed in either group. NSmRH for DE was performed safely using both SP and Xi systems. These findings indicate that the SP system represents a feasible alternative robotic platform for selected high-complexity nerve-sparing procedures in DE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41840321What 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.