Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42324398›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026

Emerging robotic platforms in gynecologic surgery: a systematic review.

Matteo Bruno, Davide Arrigo, Marco D'Indinosante, Emanuele Perrone, Nicolò Bizzarri, Giovanni Panico, Nicola Macellari, Matteo Figà, Mariano Giménez, Antonello Forgione and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Matteo Bruno *Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Davide Arrigo *Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia.
Marco D'IndinosanteDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy. marco.dindinosante@guest.policlinicogemelli.it.
Emanuele PerroneDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Nicolò BizzarriDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni PanicoDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Nicola MacellariUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia.
Matteo FigàUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia.
Mariano GiménezResearch Institute against Digestive Cancer, IRCAD, Strasbourg, France.
Antonello ForgioneResearch Institute against Digestive Cancer, IRCAD, Strasbourg, France.
Jacques MarescauxResearch Institute against Digestive Cancer, IRCAD, Strasbourg, France.
Anna FagottiDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Francesco FanfaniDipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, via Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic innovation in gynecologic surgery has expanded beyond established multiport ecosystems toward single-port, modular multi-arm, transvaginal, AI-enabled, and teleoperated platforms. However, available evidence remains fragmented and unsuitable for quantitative synthesis. This systematic review evaluated emerging robotic platforms in gynecologic surgery, focusing on procedure types, outcomes, costs, and learning curves. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261360389). Eligible studies included clinical studies evaluating emerging robotic platforms in gynecologic surgery. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched on 4 April 2026. After duplicate removal, 408 records were screened, 160 full texts assessed, and 92 studies included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently in duplicate. The 92 studies covered 13 platforms and were mainly retrospective single-center studies. Evidence was most extensive for da Vinci SP and HUGO RAS, with more limited but informative data for Senhance, Versius, hinotori, and KANGDUO. Evidence for other systems consisted mainly of first-in-human, pilot, or feasibility studies. Hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy were the most frequently reported procedures. Overall, perioperative outcomes and short-term safety appeared favorable, despite limited follow-up and heterogeneous outcome definitions. Cost data were mainly available for Senhance and KANGDUO. Learning-curve evidence was strongest for da Vinci SP and HUGO RAS. Risk-of-bias was predominantly moderate. Emerging robotic platforms have demonstrated broad technical feasibility and generally acceptable short-term perioperative safety in selected gynecologic procedures, but current evidence is heterogeneous, observational, and methodologically limited. Rigorous prospective studies, standardized economic analyses, longer follow-up, and learning-curve evaluations are needed before comparative conclusions can be drawn.

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresRobotic Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLearning CurveCost analysisEmerging robotic platformsGynecologic surgeryLearning curveMinimally invasive surgeryRobot-assisted surgery

Identifiers

PMID42324398
PMCPMC13284037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.