ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2020
Rating of camera navigation skills in colorectal surgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative assessment of laparoscopic camera navigation skill: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Image-based laparoscopic camera steering versus conventional steering: a comparison study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- How can surgical skills in laparoscopic colon surgery be objectively assessed?-a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn advanced minimally invasive surgery the laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN) quality can influence the flow of the operation. This study aimed to investigate the applicability of a scoring system for LCN (SALAS score) in colorectal surgery and whether an adequate scoring can be achieved using a specified sequence of the operation.
methodsThe score was assessed by four blinded raters using synchronized video and voice recordings of 20 randomly selected laparoscopic colorectal surgeries (group A: assessment of the entire operation; group B: assessment of the 2nd and 3rd quartile). Experience in LCN was defined as at least 100 assistances in complex laparoscopic procedures.
resultsThe surgical teams consisted of three residents, three fellows, and two attendings forming 15 different teams. The ratio between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants was balanced (n = 11 vs. n = 9). Regarding the total SALAS score, the four raters discriminated between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants, regardless of their group assignment (group A, p < 0.05; group B, p < 0.05). The score's interrater variability and reliability were proven with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88. No statistically relevant correlation was achieved between operation time and SALAS score.
conclusionThis study presents the first intraoperative, objective, and structured assessment of LCN in colorectal surgery. We could demonstrate that the SALAS score is a reliable tool for the assessment of LCN even when only the middle part (50%) of the procedure is analyzed. Construct validity was proven by discriminating between experienced and inexperienced camera assistants.
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.