ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2026
Global trends in robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumor surgery: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Research trends and hotspots in robot-assisted ophthalmic surgery: a bibliometric and visualization study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumor resection has emerged as an important minimally invasive surgical approach; however, the overall research landscape and developmental trends in this field remain insufficiently characterized. This bibliometric study systematically evaluates research patterns using publications, which were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (SCI-Expanded) database from inception to December 31, 2025, limited to English-language articles and reviews. A total of 415 publications were included, and data were analyzed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, Bibliometrix, and GraphPad Prism. Annual outputs exhibited consistent growth, particularly from 2019 onward, indicating growing scholarly attention. Research output was highest from the United States and China, while the most prominent institutions were in North America, with notable contributions from Asia and Europe. Co-cited reference analysis indicated that current research is largely based on comparative clinical studies and multicenter investigations, suggesting a transition toward evidence-based evaluation. Keyword analysis revealed that research hotspots focus mainly on surgical techniques, oncological indications, and perioperative outcomes, while recent trends highlight a growing focus on minimally invasive approaches, robotic surgical procedures, and single-port techniques. As a bibliometric analysis based on metadata, it does not assess study quality, clinical outcomes, or risk of bias; trends reflect research activity rather than validated clinical efficacy. Future investigations should employ rigorously designed multicenter trials, evaluate long-term outcomes, and incorporate patient-centered assessments to better determine the clinical impact of robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumor excision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42204073What 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.