ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2022
The transferability of laparoscopic and open surgical skills to robotic surgery.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of robot-assisted surgical training in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Randomized double-blind protocol for cross-specialty competency assessment in robotic surgery training using GEARS: a single-center initial validation study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Trial
- A national cross-sectional analysis of stakeholder views regarding the practice and governance of robotic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Factors affecting the acquisition of robotic colorectal surgical skills.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Article
- In the Hands of a Robot, From the Operating Room to the Courtroom: The Medicolegal Considerations of Robotic Surgery.Cureus · 2023Review
- Robotic Plastic Surgery Education: Developing a Robotic Surgery Training Program Specific to Plastic Surgery Trainees.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWithin the last decades, robotic surgery has gained popularity. Most robotic surgeons have changed their main surgical activity from open or laparoscopic without prior formal robotic training. With the current practice, it is of great interest to know whether there is a transfer of surgical skills. In visualization, motion scaling, and freedom of motion, robotic surgery resembles open surgery far more than laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, our hypothesis is that open-trained surgeons have more transfer of surgical skills to robotic surgery, compared to surgeons trained in laparoscopy.
methodsThirty-six surgically inexperienced medical students were randomized into three groups for intensive simulation training in an assigned modality: open surgery, laparoscopy, or robot-assisted laparoscopy. The training period was, for all study subjects, followed by performing a robot-assisted bowel anastomosis in a pig model. As surrogate markers of surgical quality, the anastomoses were tested for resistance to pressure, and video recordings of the procedure were evaluated by two blinded expert robotic surgeons, using a global rating scale of robotic operative performance (Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS)).
resultsThe mean leak pressure of bowel anastomosis was 36.25 (7.62-64.89) mmHg in the laparoscopic training group and 69.01 (28.02-109.99) mmHg in the open surgery group, and the mean leak pressure for the robotic training group was 108.45 (74.96-141.94) mmHg. The same pattern was found with GEARS as surrogate markers of surgical quality. GEARS score was 15.71 (12.37-19.04) in the laparoscopic training group, 18.14 (14.70-21.58) in the open surgery group, and 22.04 (19.29-24.79) in the robotic training group. In comparison with the laparoscopic training group, the robotic training group had a statistically higher leak pressure (p = 0.0015) and GEARS score (p = 0.0023). No significant difference, for neither leak pressure nor GEARS, between the open and the robotic training group.
conclusionIn our study, training in open surgery was superior to training in laparoscopy when transitioning to robotic surgery in a simulation setting performed by surgically naive study subjects.
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.