ArticleJournal of reconstructive microsurgery2026
Bridging the Gap between Microsurgery and Supermicrosurgery: A Rat Study for 0.3 mm Vascular Anastomosis Comparing Robotic-assisted vs. Conventional Approach.
Article in Journal of reconstructive microsurgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Supermicrosurgery involving vessels ≤0.3 mm remains among the most technically demanding procedures in reconstructive surgery. Robotic platforms have shown potential to enhance precision, but their feasibility at this extreme scale requires further validation. Methods: Apprentice surgeons (≤5 years' experience) performed rat femoral vessel (approximately 0.26-0.30 mm) anastomoses using both hand-sewn and robotic-assisted techniques across eight consecutive trials. Outcome measures included Structured Assessment of Robotic Microsurgical Skills (SARMS) scores, operative time, stitch count, and patency rate. Learning curves were assessed with cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis, and anastomotic quality was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: Robotic-assisted anastomosis reached proficiency earlier than hand-sewn repair (4th versus 6th trial). Although initial operative time was longer for robotic cases (1,772 ± 120 seconds versus 1,355 ± 187 seconds, Conclusion: Robotic-assisted supermicrosurgery enables earlier proficiency, enhanced precision, and reproducible anastomotic quality compared with hand-sewn techniques. Despite longer initial times, robotic performance rapidly improved, achieving equivalent efficiency with greater technical control. These findings confirm the technical feasibility of robotic supermicrosurgery at the 0.3 mm scale and support its potential role in microsurgical and lymphatic reconstruction training and clinical practice.
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.