ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Single-incision robotic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial experience with the EDGE SP1000 robotic system at a Shanghai center.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) has emerged as an alternative to single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC). However, clinical data evaluating newly developed single-port robotic platforms remain limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, and perioperative outcomes of SIRC performed with the EDGE SP1000 system in comparison with conventional SILC.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 30 patients who underwent EDGE-SP1000-assisted SIRC between January and May 2025, with 30 SILC patients serving as controls. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Perioperative outcomes, postoperative pain scores, and recovery parameters were analyzed. Pain was assessed at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively. Learning curves were evaluated using cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis.
resultsSIRC was successfully completed in 93.75% of the planned cases without conversion to open surgery. Compared with SILC, SIRC was associated with longer operative time (45.5 ± 10.8 vs. 32.8 ± 6.4 min, P < 0.0001). Statistically significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, time to first flatus, and postoperative pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 h (P < 0.05). No significant differences were identified in postoperative complications or length of hospital stay. Surgeon-reported assessments indicated satisfactory system usability during the initial implementation phase.
conclusionEDGE SP1000-assisted SIRC was technically feasible and was not associated with increased short-term complications compared with SILC in this retrospective series. Observed differences in perioperative outcomes require cautious interpretation and further validation in larger prospective studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42120565What 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.