ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2013
Defining the learning curve for robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 111 citations in OpenAlex.
- The learning curve of robotic esophagectomy: a systematic review with a proposed training and competency assessment framework.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- A reproducible anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a simple fix for a persistent problem in a zero-leak consecutive series.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Learning curve analysis across three surgical eras in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Nomographic predictive models for complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy: Current status and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Learning curve of Robotic Assisted Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAMIE): initial experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Enhanced short-term outcomes after full robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis procedure compared to the hybrid approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for intraoperative video analysis in robotic-assisted esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Caseload per Year in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Introduction of a new surgical robot platform "hinotori™" in an institution with established da Vinci surgery™ for digestive organ operations.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Deep learning-based recognition of key anatomical structures during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Learning curve for inflatable mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Article
- Suggested robotic-assisted thoracic surgery training curriculum.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Review
- Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?Updates in surgery · 2023Review
- Current status of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: what is the real benefit?Surgery today · 2022Review
- Today's Mistakes and Tomorrow's Wisdom in the Surgical Treatment of Barrett's Adenocarcinoma.Visceral medicine · 2022Review
- Robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy within the prospective multicenter German da Vinci Xi registry trial.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Risk of chyle leak after robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- INFLUENCE OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE LAPAROSCOPIC EXPERIENCE SKILLS ON ROBOTIC SURGERY DEXTERITY.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe expansion of robotic-assisted surgery is occurring quickly, though little is generally known about the "learning curve" for the technology with utilization for complex esophageal procedures. The purpose of this study is to define the learning curve for robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy with respect to operative time, conversion rates, and patient safety.
methodsWe have prospectively followed all patients undergoing robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy and compared operations performed at our institutions by a single surgeon in successive cohorts of 10 patients. Our measures of proficiency included: operative times, conversion rates, and complications. Statistical analyses were undertaken utilizing Spearman regression analysis and Mann-Whitney U test. Significance was accepted with 95 % confidence.
resultsFifty-two patients (41 male: 11 female) of mean age 66.2 ± 8.8 years underwent robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomies for malignant esophageal disease. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was administered to 30 (61 %) patients. A significant reduction in operative times (p <0.005) following completion of 20 procedures was identified (514 ± 106 vs. 397 ± 71.9). No conversions to open thoracotomy were required. Complication rates were low and not significantly different between any 10-patient cohort; however, no complications occurred in the final 10-patient cohort. There were no in-hospital mortalities.
conclusionsFor surgeons proficient in performing minimally-invasive esophagogastrectomies, the learning curve for a robotic-assisted procedure appears to begin near proficiency after 20 cases. Operative complications and conversions were infrequent and unchanged across successive 10-patient cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.