ReviewCureus2026
Assessing the Efficacy of the Hinotori Robotic System in Prostate Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.
Review in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer remains a major health concern worldwide. Recently, several robotic systems have been introduced for surgical treatment in urology, demonstrating promising results and gaining clinical acceptance. Among these, a surgical robot developed in Japan has become a notable option for robot-assisted procedures. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Hinotori robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (h-RARP) in the management of prostate cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies involving adult prostate cancer patients undergoing h-RARP were conducted. Literature searches were performed across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Study bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-Randomized Intervention Studies (ROBINS-I) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were performed with Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Biostat, Inc., Englewood, NJ, USA). Twelve studies, including 1,570 patients, were analyzed, of whom 716 underwent h-RARP. Compared to the comparison group undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (C-RARP), h-RARP was associated with significantly longer console time (mean difference [MD] = 29.17 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.50 to 42.83) and operative time (MD = 24.98 minutes; 95% CI: 7.33 to 42.64). No significant differences were observed in postoperative and oncological outcomes. Lymph node dissection was performed in 31% of cases, and nerve-sparing was achieved in 29.3%. The positive surgical margin rate was 26.8%, while biochemical recurrence at 12 months occurred in 8.6% of h-RARP patients. In summary, while h-RARP appears to involve longer console and operative times compared to the comparison group (C-RARP), further research is required to fully clarify its clinical benefits.
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.