ArticleBMC surgery2024
Prospective learning curve analysis of en bloc resection of bladder tumor using an ex vivo porcine model.
Article in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Face and content validation of TURP and TURB simulation models: an EAU European School of Urology (ESU) Lower Urinary Tract Endoscopy Working Group Study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Defining the learning curve for thulium LaserFrontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Recent Advances and Emerging Innovations in Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor (TURBT) for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of Current Literature.Research and reports in urology · 2025Review
- Development of a Personalized and Simplified Ovarian Cystectomy Practice Tool.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs a relatively new surgical technique, the learning curve of en bloc resection of bladder tumor (ERBT) in ex vivo models remains unaddressed. This study aimed to explore the learning curve of ERBT in an ex vivo porcine model.
methodsIn this prospective study, eight endoscopists without prior experience in ERBT were divided into two groups: junior endoscopists, with less than 100 transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) procedure experience, and senior endoscopists, with at least 100 TURBT procedure experience. Each endoscopist performed 30 ERBT procedures on artificial lesions in an ex vivo porcine bladder model. The procedure time, perforation, en bloc resection status, and absence of detrusor muscle (DM) were recorded. The inflection points were identified using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Procedure results were compared between the two phases and two groups.
resultsIn all, 240 artificial lesions were successfully resected using ERBT. The CUSUM regression line indicated the inflection point at the 16th procedure for the junior endoscopists and at the 13th procedure for the senior endoscopists. In both groups, the procedure time, perforation, piecemeal resection, and DM absence rates were significantly lower in the consolidation phase than in the initial phase. The procedure time for the senior endoscopists was lower than for the junior endoscopists in both phases.
conclusionsERBT performance improved significantly after reaching the inflection point of the learning curve in the ex vivo model. We recommend a minimum of 16 ERBT procedures in ex vivo models for urologists with less than 100 TURBT experience and a minimum of 13 procedures for those with at least 100 TURBT experience before advancing to live animal training or supervised clinical practice.
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.