Observational studyJournal of robotic surgery2026
Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopy and robotic-assisted surgery in the surgical treatment of endometriosis: a retrospective study.
Observational study 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive surgery is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. However, controversy remains in the literature regarding the perioperative benefits of robotic-assisted surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery, particularly regarding operative efficiency. To compare perioperative outcomes between laparoscopy and robotic-assisted surgery in the surgical treatment of endometriosis in a high-volume tertiary center. Retrospective, observational, and analytical study including patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of endometriosis at Einstein Hospital Israelita between 2018 and 2022. A random sample of 520 patients was drawn from all eligible medical records in the period, with 260 patients in each surgical group; the surgical approach was determined by surgeon preference rather than a standardized protocol. Outcomes evaluated included surgical time, anesthetic time, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complications, need for intensive care, conversion to laparotomy, and early readmission. Demographic characteristics were similar between the groups, although the two groups differed in prior surgical history. Robotic-assisted surgery was associated with significantly shorter operative and anesthetic times, in addition to shorter hospital stays, when compared to laparoscopic surgery. There was no statistically significant difference between the approaches in terms of complication rates, surgical conversion, need for intensive care, blood transfusion or early readmission. Both approaches demonstrated a similar safety profile in the surgical treatment of endometriosis. In this experienced tertiary center, robotic-assisted surgery was associated with greater perioperative effectiveness; because the disease-severity and case-complexity of each group could not be formally quantified, this association should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and confirmed by prospective, adjusted studies before it informs a general recommendation on surgical approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42803892What 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.