Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38965320›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2025

Robotising vitreoretinal surgeries.

Helen Mi, Robert E MacLaren, Jasmina Cehajic-Kapetanovic

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Cell therapy for age-related macular degeneration.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Gene therapy for choroideremia: progress, potential and pitfalls.Expert opinion on biological therapy · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Helen MiOxford Eye Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0263-1490
Robert E MacLarenOxford Eye Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3096-4682
Jasmina Cehajic-KapetanovicOxford Eye Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. jasmina.kapetanovic@eye.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9956-6412

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of robotic surgery in ophthalmology has been shown to offer many potential advantages to current surgical techniques. Vitreoretinal surgery requires complex manoeuvres and high precision, and this is an area that exceeds manual human dexterity in certain surgical situations. With the advent of advanced therapeutics such as subretinal gene therapy, precise delivery and minimising trauma is imperative to optimize outcomes. There are multiple robotic systems in place for ophthalmology in pre-clinical and clinical use, and the Preceyes Robotic Surgical System (Preceyes BV) has also gained the CE mark and is commercially available for use. Recent in-vivo and in-human surgeries have been performed successfully with robotics systems. This includes membrane peeling, subretinal injections of therapeutics, and retinal vein cannulation. There is huge potential to integrate robotic surgery into mainstream clinical practice. In this review, we summarize the existing systems, and clinical implementation so far, and highlight the future clinical applications for robotic surgery in vitreo-retina.

Indexed as

Retinal DiseasesRobotic Surgical ProceduresVitreoretinal SurgeryHumans

Identifiers

PMID38965320
PMCPMC11885832

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.