Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33030590›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Impact of laparoscopic surgical experience on the learning curve of robotic rectal cancer surgery.

Gyoung Tae Noh, Myunghyun Han, Hyuk Hur, Seung Hyuk Baik, Kang Young Lee, Nam Kyu Kim, Byung Soh Min

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024).Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gyoung Tae NohDepartment of Surgery, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Myunghyun HanDepartment of Surgery, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Hyuk HurDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Seung Hyuk BaikDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Kang Young LeeDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Nam Kyu KimDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Byung Soh MinDepartment of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. bsmin@yuhs.ac.
Yonsei University · KREwha Womans University · KRSeverance Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic surgery has advantages in terms of the ergonomic design and expectations of shortening the learning curve, which may reduce the number of patients with adverse outcomes during a surgeon's learning period. We investigated the differences in the learning curves of robotic surgery and clinical outcomes for rectal cancer among surgeons with differences in their experiences of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

methodsPatients who underwent robotic surgery for colorectal cancer were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into five groups by surgeons, and their clinical outcomes were analyzed. The learning curve of each surgeon with different volumes of laparoscopic experience was analyzed using the cumulative sum technique (CUSUM) for operation times, surgical failure (open conversion or anastomosis-related complications), and local failure (positive resection margins or local recurrence within 1 year).

resultsA total of 662 patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer were included in the analysis. Number of laparoscopic LAR cases performed by surgeon A, B, C, D, and E prior to their first case of robotic surgery were 403, 40, 15, 5, and 0 cases, respectively. Based on CUSUM for operation time, surgeon A, B, C, D, and E's learning curve periods were 110, 39, 114, 55, and 23 cases, respectively. There were no significant differences in the surgical and oncological outcomes after robotic LAR among the surgeons.

conclusionsThis study demonstrated the limited impact of laparoscopic surgical experience on the learning curve of robotic rectal cancer surgery, which was greater than previously reported curves.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansLearning CurveNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic experienceLearning curveRectal cancerRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID33030590
OpenAlexW3091771037

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.