Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28812257›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2018

Robotic-assisted microvascular surgery: skill acquisition in a rat model.

Nicholas S Clarke, Johnathan Price, Travis Boyd, Stefano Salizzoni, Kenton J Zehr, Alejandro Nieponice, Pietro Bajona

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicholas S ClarkeDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-8879, USA.
Johnathan PriceDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-8879, USA.
Travis BoydDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-8879, USA.
Stefano SalizzoniDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Kenton J ZehrDepartment of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Alejandro NieponiceMcGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Pietro BajonaDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-8879, USA. Pietro.Bajona@UTSouthwestern.edu.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · USConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microsurgery is a technically demanding field with long learning curves. Robotic-assisted microsurgery has the ability to decrease these learning curves. We, therefore, sought to assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted microvascular surgery in a rat model, and whether this could be translated into a worthwhile skills acquisition exercise for residents. Twenty-eight rats underwent microvascular anastomosis. Procedures were performed by a trained microvascular surgeon with no robotic experience (n = 14), or a trained robotic surgeon with no microvascular experience (n = 14). Anesthetized rats were subjected to complete transection and end-to-end anastomosis of the abdominal aorta using 10-0 prolene. Manually (n = 6) and robotic-assisted (n = 8) procedures were performed by both surgeons. A successful procedure required a patent anastomosis and no bleeding. After approximately 35 days, angiography and histopathological studies of the anastomoses were performed. Median times for robotic-assisted anastomoses were 37.5 (34.2-42.7) min for the microsurgeon and 38.5 (32.7-52) min for robotic surgeon. In the manual group, it took 17 (13.5-23) min for microsurgeon and 44 (34.5-60) min for robotic surgeon. Within the robotic-assisted group, there was a trend toward improvement in both surgeons, but greater in the microsurgeon. Robotic-assisted microvascular anastomosis in a rat model is a feasible skill acquisition exercise. By eliminating the need for a skilled microsurgical assistant, as well as, improved microsurgical technology, the robotic system may prove to be a crucial player in future microsurgical skill training.

Indexed as

AnimalsAorta, AbdominalClinical CompetenceHumansLearning CurveMicrosurgeryOperative TimePilot ProjectsRatsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsMicrovascular surgeryRobotic-assisted surgeryRobotic microvascular simulationSurgical education

Identifiers

PMID28812257
OpenAlexW2742518771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.