ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2026
The robotic PIANO: a critical narrative review of surgeon-controlled operative polyphony, human factors, and robotic training.
Review 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
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic surgery can concentrate control of several technical functions at the console, but such concentration does not itself confer clinical independence, reduce dependence on the perioperative team, or improve patient outcomes. We define surgeon-controlled operative polyphony as the phase-bounded coordination of multiple partially independent technical control streams by one console operator within a distributed perioperative system. This critical narrative review and conceptual synthesis asks which technical functions can be concentrated coherently, where human-factors and team dependencies set limits, and how evaluation, training, and governance should respond. The piano is used as a question-generating model, not as evidence of clinical benefit. PubMed/MEDLINE was searched from inception through 18 August 2026; targeted engineering, educational, neuroscientific, human-factors, and musicological searches and backward citation tracking supplemented retrieval. To analyze this control configuration, we propose the PIANO framework: Phase-specific control, Interface fidelity, Agency allocation, Neuromotor integration, and Orchestrated teamwork. Its scientific novelty lies in linking this control architecture to the PIANO framework: Phase-specific control, Interface fidelity, Agency allocation, Neuromotor integration, and Orchestrated teamwork. PIANO is an analytic and hypothesis-generating framework, not a score or credentialing standard. Concentrated control may shorten selected action loops, but any benefit depends on feedback, workload, shared situation awareness, explicit authority, and rescue capacity. The Competency-Based Assessment of Robotic Surgery Skills (CARS) curriculum provides initial validation evidence for domain-specific assessment of performer competence; repeated cases and use-specific evidence remain necessary for high-stakes decisions. Artificial intelligence (AI) may support phase recognition, feedback, assessment, and personalised training within a human-in-the-loop system. One surgeon may coordinate many operative voices; safe surgery remains a collective, patient-centered performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.