ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Resuscitation during robotic-assisted pelvic surgery: impact of simulation training and system-specific factors.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intraoperative cardiac arrest during robotic-assisted surgery is rare but poses challenges due to limited patient access and the need for undocking. Evidence on structured team training and system-specific factors affecting time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) remains limited. This prospective single-center simulation study evaluated six multidisciplinary teams managing standardized cardiac arrest scenarios with the daVinci® and HugoRAS® system. Teams completed three simulations: an unannounced baseline scenario, a second scenario following structured debriefing and introduction of a standardized emergency flowchart, and a third scenario after 3–5 months to assess skill retention. Primary endpoint was time to CPR initiation. Secondary endpoints were protocol adherence and undocking time. Repeated training significantly reduced time to CPR (58.2 ± 26.2 s vs. 31.8 ± 8.9 s; p = 0.03) and improved compliance with the emergency flowchart (p = 0.03). While overall time to CPR initiation did not differ between robotic systems (daVinci®: 48.0 ± 23.5 vs. HugoRAS®: 43.2 ± 16.1, p = 0.6), undocking time was significantly shorter with the daVinci® compared to the HugoRAS® system (20.8 ± 2.4 s vs. 41.0 ± 7.5 s; p < 0.001). Undocking phase accounted for 48.9 ± 14.0% of the time leading up to the CPR in DaVinci® and 69.8 ± 13.1% in HugoRAS®. Simulation-based multidisciplinary team training may improve resuscitation performance during robotic-assisted surgery. Undocking was the main source of delay with system-specific differences. Standardized emergency protocols and regular simulation training should be implemented to enhance patient safety in robotic operating rooms.
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.