ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Artificial intelligence in robotic urologic surgery: a scoping review.
Article in World journal of urology, 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimArtificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into robotic urologic surgery. However, existing literature remains fragmented across different technological domains. This scoping review aimed to systematically map and synthesize current evidence on AI applications within robotic urologic surgery, identifying principal domains, clinical relevance, and existing limitations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. PubMed and Web of Science were searched for English-language peer-reviewed studies published between 2018 and 2024. Studies were included if they evaluated AI applications integrated into the robotic surgical workflow (computer vision, augmented reality, cognitive analytics, skill assessment, or outcomes prediction). Reviews, editorials, and non-robotic applications were excluded. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 256 records identified, 47 met the inclusion criteria. Applications were distributed across five domains: computer vision (19%), augmented reality and navigation (15%), AI-driven objective skill assessment (30%), cognitive analytics (17%), and surgical outcomes prediction (19%). Most studies were single-center feasibility investigations. Computer vision demonstrated high technical accuracy for instrument and gesture recognition, while AI-based performance metrics showed emerging associations with clinically relevant outcomes. Augmented reality systems improved anatomical visualization and surgical planning, and cognitive analytics explored real-time workload assessment.
conclusionAI in robotic urologic surgery is predominantly focused on assistive and analytical applications, particularly intraoperative image analysis and objective performance assessment. While early evidence suggests technical feasibility and potential clinical value, most systems remain investigational. Robust multicenter validation, workflow integration, and governance frameworks addressing accountability and data management are required before routine clinical implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42613394What 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.