The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Laparoscopy vs. Robotic Surgery for Endometriosis (LAROSE): a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
Objective To determine whether the use of the robot for surgical treatment of endometriosis is better than traditional laparoscopy in terms of operative length, perioperative parameters, and quality of life outcomes. Design Multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Setting University teaching hospitals. Patient(s) Women aged >18 years with suspected endometriosis who elected to undergo surgical management. Intervention(s) Randomization to conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic removal of endometriosis. Main outcome measure(s) The primary outcome measured was operative time. Secondary outcomes were perioperative complications and quality of life. Result(s) The mean operative time for robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis was 106.6 ± 48.4 minutes vs. 101.6 ± 63.2 minutes. There were no differences in blood loss, intraoperative or postoperative complications, or rates of conversion to laparotomy in the two arms. Both groups reported significant improvement on condition-specific quality of life outcomes at 6 weeks and 6 months. Conclusion(s) There were no differences in perioperative outcomes between robotic and conventional laparoscopy. Clinical trial registration number NCT01556204.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The results of the first RCT comparing RAS and conventional laparoscopy for endometriosis excision (Soto et al., 2017) confirm the findings of previous observational studies (Berlanda et al., 2017).”
From When more is not better: 10 ‘don’ts’ in endometriosis management. An ETIC* position statement (2019) · cites this paper as Soto et al., 2017
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“In fact, no significant differences were observed between the two surgical approaches in terms of operative time, complications, and clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up.”
From When more is not better: 10 ‘don’ts’ in endometriosis management. An ETIC* position statement (2019) · cites this paper as Soto et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
WARE, J. E., KOSINSKI, M., & KELLER, S. D. (1996) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 · Cited by 17,392
Revised American Fertility Society Classification of Endometriosis: 1985
(1985) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)48430-x · Cited by 1,803
Simoens, S., Dunselman, G., Dirksen, C., Hummelshoj, L., Bokor, A., Brandes, I., Brodszky, V., Canis, M., Colombo, G. L., DeLeire, T., et al. (2012) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/des073 · Cited by 1,070
Self-citationClinical Management of Endometriosis
Falcone, T., & Flyckt, R. L. (2018) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002469 · Cited by 582
Self-citationSurgical Treatment of Endometriosis: A 7-Year Follow-up on the Requirement for Further Surgery
Shakiba, K., Bena, J. F., McGill, K. M., Minger, J., & Falcone, T. (2008) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181758ec6 · Cited by 339
Self-citationDevelopment of an endometriosis quality-of-life instrument: The Endometriosis Health Profile-30
Jones, G. (2001) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01433-8 · Cited by 334
Incidence of endometriosis by study population and diagnostic method: the ENDO study
Buck Louis, G. M., Hediger, M. L., Peterson, C. M., Croughan, M., Sundaram, R., Stanford, J., Chen, Z., Fujimoto, V. Y., Varner, M. W., Trumble, A., et al. (2011) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.05.087 · Cited by 309
Clinical Management of Endometriosis
Falcone, T., & Lebovic, D. I. (2011) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31822adfd1 · Cited by 264
Self-citationPre and post-operative medical therapy for endometriosis surgery
Furness, S., Yap, C., Farquhar, C. M., & Cheong, Y. C. (2004) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003678.pub2 · Cited by 257
EVIDENCE FOR THE RISK OF PELVIC ENDOMETRIOSIS BY AGE, RACE AND SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS1
Houston, D. E. (1984) · Epidemiologic Reviews · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036270 · Cited by 196
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Endometriosis is a chronic systemic disease: Clinical challenges and novel innovations
Taylor, H. S., Kotlyar, A. M., & Flores, V. A. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00389-5 · Cited by 1,425
Clinical Management of Endometriosis
Falcone, T., & Flyckt, R. L. (2018) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002469 · Cited by 582
Self-citationSmolarz, B., Szyłło, K., & Romanowicz, H. (2021) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms221910554 · Cited by 560
Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis
Duffy, J. M., Arambage, K., Correa, F. J., Olive, D. L., Farquhar, C. M., Garry, R., Barlow, D. H., & Jacobson, T. Z. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011031.pub2 · Cited by 359
Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology
Liu, H., Lawrie, T. A., Lu, D., Song, H., Wang, L., & Shi, G. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011422 · Cited by 138
Metadata
- Authors
- Soto, E., Luu, T. H., Liu, X., Magrina, J. F., Wasson, M. N., Einarsson, J. I., Cohen, S. L., & Falcone, T.
- Affiliations
- Cleveland Clinic (US)
- Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Falcone, Tommaso
- ORCID
- Venue
- Fertility and Sterility
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-04
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 996-1002.e3
- ISSN
- 0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2589501886
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 11.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Cleveland Clinic
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
- Keywords
- endometriosis, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, conventional laparoscopy, operative time, perioperative complications, conversion to open surgery, blood loss, quality of life, endometriosis surgery
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Endometriosis, Female, Hospitals, University, Humans, Laparoscopy, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Time Factors, United States, Blood Loss, Surgical, Treatment Outcome, Operative Time, Conversion to Open Surgery, Robotic Surgical Procedures
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
