SynthesisThe international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS2026
Remote Telesurgery Versus Local Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Comparative Evidence Base.
Synthesis in The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS, 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
backgroundRemote telesurgery allows surgeons to operate over a distance using robotic systems and advanced networks. This review aims to compare remote telesurgery with local minimally invasive surgery (MIS) regarding patient outcomes and system-level outcomes.
methodsA PRISMA-compliant systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42023474196) searched six databases to 1 August 2025 for studies comparing remote telesurgery with local MIS in living patients.
resultsAmong 5737 records, one retrospective cohort met the criteria. It compared 5G-enabled remote robotic pelvic fracture surgery (n = 80) with local robotic surgery (n = 80). Remote procedures had lower blood loss (20 vs. 50 mL) and shorter incisions (1.25 vs. 1.5 cm). Operative time did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.177), and complications, hospital stay, and functional outcomes were similar.
conclusionsComparative data on telesurgery remain limited, and healthcare system benefits are unproven. Future studies should incorporate direct comparisons and systematically evaluate system-level outcomes.
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.