ReviewPatient safety in surgery2026
When seconds matter - introducing a surgical salvage strategy by emergency robotic surgery: a review.
Review in Patient safety in 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
Robotic surgery has expanded minimally invasive options but introduces specific vulnerabilities during intraoperative emergencies. The physical separation of the surgeon from the patient, restricted access due to docking, and dependence on complex technology can delay life‑saving interventions if teams are not prepared. This review summarizes current evidence and expert practice on emergency management along the perioperative pathway in robotic surgery, focusing on a structured, systems‑based salvage strategy. Key domains include preoperative planning, classification of recoverable and non‑recoverable errors, and standardized protocols for rapid undocking, conversion, hemorrhage control, and resuscitation. Particular emphasis is placed on human factors, including visible name tags, closed‑loop communication, and structured briefings to strengthen situational awareness and role clarity in crises. Simulation‑based curricula and high‑fidelity in situ drills are highlighted as essential for rehearsing rare but high‑impact events such as catastrophic bleeding, cardiorespiratory collapse, or robotic system failure. In parallel, technology‑driven tools such as surgeon‑controlled suction, advanced vessel sealing, and artificial‑intelligence-assisted monitoring are discussed as adjuncts for earlier recognition and standardized documentation of critical events. Integrating these elements into protocolized workflows can improve preparedness, shorten response times, and support safer decision‑making when seconds matter in robotic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.