ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Early matched comparison of a novel modular carina robotic platform and the da vinci system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
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
Abstract
This study reports the first clinical comparison of the novel modular Carina robotic platform with the established da Vinci system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), including 6-month outcomes. This single-center study included a prospective cohort of 32 patients undergoing Carina RARP and a retrospective cohort of 105 patients treated with da Vinci RARP. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative data were analyzed. Groups were matched 1:2 using propensity scores based on preoperative characteristics. All patients underwent 6-month follow-up assessing feasibility, safety, oncological outcomes, and urinary continence. Following matching, 32 Carina patients were compared with 64 da Vinci patients. Baseline characteristics were largely well balanced after matching. Total operative time was modestly longer in the Carina group than in the da Vinci group (median 138 vs. 130 min), whereas console time (91 vs. 85 min) and docking time (5 min for both) were comparable between systems. Operative time decreased as platform-specific experience accumulated in later Carina cases. At 6 weeks, the satisfactory biochemical response rate (PSA < 0.1 ng/mL) was identical between groups (90.6%). Urinary continence rates at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months were 34.4%, 81.3%, and 90.6% for Carina versus 31.3%, 76.6%, and 87.5% for da Vinci, with no significant differences. The Carina system appears safe and feasible for RARP, with early oncological and continence outcomes similar to those observed with the da Vinci system in this pilot matched cohort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42474819What 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.