Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33825015›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Learning curve of three European centers in laparoscopic, hybrid laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.

Pavel Tyutyunnik, Sjors Klompmaker, Carlo Lombardo, Hryhoriy Lapshyn, Francesca Menonna, Niccolò Napoli, Ulrich Wellner, Roman Izrailov, Magomet Baychorov, Mark G Besselink and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism Rate After Pancreatoduodenectomy Based on Operative Approach.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    Article
  17. 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

16 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Pavel TyutyunnikDepartment of High-Tech and Endoscopic Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center Named After A.C.Loginov, Entusiastov shosse, 86, Moscow, Russia, 111123. p.tyutyunnik@mknc.ru.ORCID 0000-0002-6410-7355
Sjors KlompmakerDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Carlo LombardoDepartment of Transplant and General Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Hryhoriy LapshynDepartment of Surgery, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Francesca MenonnaDepartment of Transplant and General Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Niccolò NapoliDepartment of Transplant and General Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Ulrich WellnerDepartment of Surgery, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Roman IzrailovDepartment of High-Tech and Endoscopic Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center Named After A.C.Loginov, Entusiastov shosse, 86, Moscow, Russia, 111123.
Magomet BaychorovDepartment of High-Tech and Endoscopic Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center Named After A.C.Loginov, Entusiastov shosse, 86, Moscow, Russia, 111123.
Mark G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Moh'd Abu HilalChair of the Department of Surgery, Head of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Via Bissolati, Brescia, Italy.
Abe FingerhutSection for Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Ugo BoggiDepartment of Transplant and General Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Tobias KeckDepartment of Surgery, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Igor KhatkovDepartment of High-Tech and Endoscopic Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center Named After A.C.Loginov, Entusiastov shosse, 86, Moscow, Russia, 111123.
European Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery
University of Pisa · ITMoscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry · RUUniversitäres Kinderwunschzentrum Lübeck · DEAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLFondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero · ITMoscow Clinical Scientific Center · RUShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere are limited numbers of high-volume centers performing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) routinely. Several approaches to MIPD have been described. Aim of this analysis was to show the learning curve of three different approaches to MIPD. Focus was on determining the number of cases necessary to obtain proficient level in MIPD. PATIENTS AND

methodsRetrospective study wherein outcomes of 300 consecutive patients at three centers-at each center the initial 100 consecutive patients undergoing MIPD for malignant and benign tumors of the head of the pancreas and perimpullary area, performed by three experienced surgeons were collected and analyzed.

resultsOverall, 300 patients after MIPD were included: the three different cohorts (laparoscopic n = 100, hybrid n = 100, robotic n = 100). CUSUM analysis of operating time in each center demonstrated that the plateau for laparoscopic PD was n = 61, for hybrid PDes was n = 32 and for robotic PD was n = 68. Median operative time for laparoscopic, hybrid, and robotic approaches was 395 min, 404 min, 510 min, respectively. Intraoperative blood loss for laparoscopic PD, hybrid PD, and robotic PD was 250 ml, 250 ml, and 413 ml, respectively. Delayed gastric emptying occurred 12% in laparoscopic cohort, 10% in hybrid, and 53% in robotic cohort. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo III/IV) rate for laparoscopic PD, hybrid PD, and robotic PD was 32%, 37%, and 22% with 5% death in each cohorts, respectively.

conclusionThis analysis of the learning curve of three European centers found a shorter learning curve with hybrid PD as compared to laparoscopic and robotic PD. In implementation of a MIPD program, a stepwise approach might be beneficial.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansLearning CurveOperative TimePancreaticoduodenectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesLaparoscopic-assisted surgeryLaparoscopic surgeryLearning curveMinimally invasive surgeryPancreatectomyPancreatoduodenectomyRobot-assisted surgery

Identifiers

PMID33825015
OpenAlexW3142023217

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.