ArticleJournal of surgical education2023
Automated analysis of intraoperative phase in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A comparison of one attending surgeon and their residents.
Article in Journal of surgical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Objective technical skills assessment in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review of manual, kinematic, and AI-based tools.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Surgical Skill Decay as a Result of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study compares the intraoperative phase times in laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed by an attending surgeon and supervised residents over 10-years to assess operative times as a marker of performance and any impact of case severity on times.
designLaparoscopic cholecystectomy videos were uploaded to Touch Surgery™ Enterprise, a combined software and hardware solution for securely recording, storing, and analysing surgical videos, which provide analytics of intraoperative phase times. Case severity and visualisation of the critical view of safety (CVS) were manually assessed using modified 10-point intraoperative gallbladder scoring system (mG10) and CVS scores, respectively. Attending and residents' times were compared unmatched and matched by mG10.
settingSecondary analysis of anonymized laparoscopic cholecystectomy video, recorded as standard of care.
participantsAdult patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy a single UK hospital. Cases were performed by one attending and their residents.
results159 (attending=96, resident=63) laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos and intraoperative phase times were reviewed on Touch Surgery™ Enterprise and analyzed. Attending cases were more challenging (p=0.037). Residents achieved higher CVS scores (p=0.034) and showed longer dissection of hepatocystic triangle (HCT) times (p=0.012) in more challenging cases. Residents' total operative time (p=0.001) and dissection of HCT (p=0.002) times exceeded the attending's in low-severity matched cases (mG10=1). Residents' total operative times (p<0.001), port insertion/gallbladder exposure (p=0.032), and dissection of HCT (p<0.001) exceeded the attending's in matched cases (mG10=2). Residents' total operative (p<0.001), dissection of HCT (p<0.001), and gallbladder dissection (p=0.010) times exceeded the attendings in unmatched cases.
conclusionsResidents' total operative and dissection of HCT times significantly exceeded the attending's unmatched cases and low-severity matched cases which could suggest training need, however, also reflects an expected assessment of competence, and validates time as a marker of performance.
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.