ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Learning curve of robotic rectal surgery using risk-adjusted cumulative summation: a 5-year institutional experience.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning curve for lateral lymph node dissection in rectal cancer - a systematic review of literature.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, and mortality.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic rectal resection: impact on primary postoperative ileus and the role of intraoperative fluid balance: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Risk-adjusted learning curve for robotic colorectal surgery in an educational setting: a single-center consecutive series.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- From open to robotic distal pancreatectomy: the learning curve and mastering benchmark outcomes in a Scandinavian high volume center.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Global trends and hotspots in the learning curves of robotic-assisted surgery: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Learning Curve for Robotic Colorectal Surgery.Cancers · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOutline learning phases of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer and compare surgical and clinical outcomes between each phase of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and the mastery phase of conventional laparoscopic surgery.
methodsFrom 2015 to 2020, 210 patients underwent rectal cancer surgery at Sendai Medical Center. We performed conventional laparoscopic surgery in 110 patients and, laparoscopic surgery in 100 patients. The learning curve was evaluated using the cumulative summation method, risk-adjusted cumulative summation method, and logistic regression analysis.
resultsThe risk-adjusted cumulative summation learning curve was divided into three phases: phase 1 (cases 1-48), phase 2 (cases 49-80), and phase 3 (cases 81-100). Duration of hospital stay (13.1 days vs. 18.0 days, respectively; p = 0.016) and surgery (209.1 min vs. 249.5 min, respectively; p = 0.045) were significantly shorter in phase 3 of the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group. Blood loss volume was significantly lower in phase 1 of the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group (17.7 ml vs. 79.7 ml, respectively; p = 0.036). The International Prostate Symptom Score was significantly lower in the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group (p = 0.0131).
conclusionsRobot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer was safe and demonstrated better surgical and clinical outcomes, including a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and a shorter surgical duration, than conventional laparoscopic surgery. After experience with at least 80 cases, tactile familiarity can be acquired from visual information only (visual haptic feedback). CLINICAL
trial registrationUMIN reference no. UMIN000019857.
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.