ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Short-term clinical outcomes of a European training programme for robotic colorectal surgery.
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 26 papers, 5 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of comprehensive Robotic-assisted surgical (RAS) curricula.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Textbook oncologic outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- 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 · 2024Guideline
- Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Safety and feasibility of robotic component separation for ventral hernia repair: first Korean multi-center experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Understanding Textbook outcome failure after robotic colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter domain-specific analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
- Pre-Procedural Robotic Surgery Curricula: A Systematic Review and Thematic Meta-Synthesis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
- Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Treatment in 2026: An Updated Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Postoperative outcomes of bariatric surgery performed by trainees: a retrospective single-centre study from a Swiss regional hospital.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Impact and evolution of minimal invasive surgery in a centralized colorectal service: trends, safety and oncological outcomes across 15 years.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Adoption and implementation of robotic colorectal surgery using structured training approach: an experience from tertiary referral center.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Adoption and implementation of robotic surgery in Türkiye: a multi-level qualitative analysis of individual, institutional, and systemic dynamics.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- The evolution of training in robotic colorectal surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Scaling robotic surgery: the role, responsibilities and challenges of robotic proctorship in colorectal surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Concurrent robotic colorectal surgical oncology training within a structured mentored international fellowship program.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Key steps in exposure techniques for robotic total mesorectal excision (TME).Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- [First experience with robotic-assisted colorectal surgery].Magyar onkologia · 2024Article
- Skill progress during a dedicated societal robotic surgery training curriculum including several robotic surgery platforms.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Observational
- Outcomes in robotic-assisted compared to laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery in a newly established colorectal tertiary center: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite there being a considerable amount of published studies on robotic colorectal surgery (RCS) over the last few years, there is a lack of evidence regarding RCS training pathways. This study examines the short-term clinical outcomes of an international RCS training programme (the European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery-EARCS).
methodsConsecutive cases from 26 European colorectal units who conducted RCS between 2014 and 2018 were included in this study. The baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of cases performed by EARCS delegates during training were analysed and compared with cases performed by EARCS graduates and proctors.
resultsData from 1130 RCS procedures were collected and classified into three cohort groups (323 training, 626 graduates and 181 proctors). The training cases conversion rate was 2.2% and R1 resection rate was 1.5%. The three groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics with the exception of malignant cases and rectal resections performed. With the exception of operative time, blood loss and hospital stay (training vs. graduate vs. proctor: operative time 302, 265, 255 min, p < 0.001; blood loss 50, 50, 30 ml, p < 0.001; hospital stay 7, 6, 6 days, p = 0.003), all remaining short-term outcomes (conversion, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, clinical anastomotic leak, complications, R1 resection and lymph node yield) were comparable between the three groups.
conclusionsColorectal surgeons learning how to perform RCS under the EARCS-structured training pathway can safely achieve short-term clinical outcomes comparable to their trainers and overcome the learning process in a way that minimises patient harm.
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.