ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Comment on "A comparative analysis of the carbon footprint in minimally invasive colorectal surgery: laparoscopic versus robotic-the coloprint pilot study".
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Coloprint pilot study by Planellas et al. provides timely evidence on the carbon footprint of laparoscopic versus robotic colorectal surgery, bringing sustainability into surgical innovation. While important, its single-center design, small sample size, and narrow focus on intraoperative energy use limit generalizability. Comprehensive life-cycle assessments-including supply chain emissions from instruments, disposables, and platform maintenance-are needed to capture the true environmental burden. Future studies should integrate sustainability metrics with clinical outcomes such as complications and length of stay, adopt standardized carbon auditing frameworks, and involve multicenter collaborations. By expanding the scope and aligning with international sustainability benchmarks, research can ensure that robotic innovation advances both patient care and planetary health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40879832What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.