SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Applications of artificial intelligence in robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review.
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. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To characterize applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in robot-assisted surgery, summarize technical and clinical performance, and assess the quality of the available evidence. PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus were searched for English-language journal articles published from 1 January 2020 through 31 October 2025. Randomized, observational, model-development, validation, and feasibility studies evaluating AI in robot-assisted surgery or closely related image-guided minimally invasive workflows were eligible. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. Owing to heterogeneity in surgical procedures, AI tasks, analytical units, validation strategies, and outcomes, findings were synthesized descriptively without statistical pooling. The review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD420251175699). Seventeen studies were included: seven clinical prediction or decision-support studies, eight intraoperative recognition, segmentation, or image-guided studies, and two training or workflow studies. Five prediction studies reported area-under-the-curve values of 0.74-0.95. Technical studies reported F1 or Dice scores of 0.525-0.995 and task-specific accuracies of 0.840-0.998. Two randomized studies suggested benefits for personalized suturing feedback and automated camera control, but neither established improved patient outcomes. Only one study had low overall risk of bias; the remaining studies were at high or unclear risk or raised some concerns. AI applications in robot-assisted surgery show promise for prediction, intraoperative perception, training, and workflow support. Evidence primarily demonstrates technical feasibility rather than established clinical effectiveness. Independent multicenter validation and prospective evaluation of patient, educational, and workflow outcomes are required before widespread implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42704405What 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.