Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42332746›Full record

SynthesisBMC surgery2026

Hugo™ RAS versus da Vinci

Wajahat Mirza, Muhammad Haroon Haider, Talal Habib, Rao Nouman Ali, Muhammad Bilal Moeen-Ud-Din, Abdalla M Hadhoud

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Wajahat MirzaShifa College of Medicine, Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University, Sector H-8/4, Islamabad, Pakistan. wajahatmirza.clinicalresearch@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9811-7754
Muhammad Haroon HaiderTrust Doctor Urology Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Talal HabibUrology Department, Gujranwala Medical College, Gujranwala, Pakistan.
Rao Nouman AliDistrict Headquarters Hospital, Khanewal, Pakistan.
Muhammad Bilal Moeen-Ud-DinDepartment of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Abdalla M HadhoudDepartment of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe comparative adoption of the Hugo™ robotic-assisted surgery platform for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is increasing; however, the strength and consistency of prospective head-to-head evidence versus da Vinci

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to January 2026. Prospective comparative studies enrolling patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing RARP with Hugo™ versus da Vinci

resultsThree prospective comparative studies comprising 145 Hugo RAS cases and 145 da Vinci cases were included. The primary outcome, intraoperative complications, showed no statistically significant difference between Hugo™ RAS and da Vinci

conclusionsIn the currently available prospective comparative evidence, Hugo™ RAS showed no statistically significant difference from da Vinci

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansMaleProspective Studiesda VinciGRADEHugo RASLocalized prostate cancerMeta-analysisROBINS IRobot-assisted radical prostatectomySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42332746
PMCPMC13540807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.