Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38492057›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024

Defining the learning curve for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for a single surgeon following experience with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Isabel DeLaura, Jeremy Sharib, John M Creasy, Samuel I Berchuck, Dan G Blazer, Michael E Lidsky, Kevin N Shah, Sabino Zani

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Isabel DeLauraDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Jeremy SharibDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
John M CreasyDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Samuel I BerchuckDepartment of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Dan G BlazerDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Michael E LidskyDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Kevin N ShahDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Sabino ZaniDepartment of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Duke University, Medical Center 3247, 456E Seeley G. Mudd Bldg, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. sabino.zani@duke.edu.
Duke Medical Center · USDuke University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has a learning curve of approximately 30-250 cases to reach proficiency. The learning curve for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) at Duke University was previously defined as 50 cases. This study describes the RPD learning curve for a single surgeon following experience with LPD. LPD and RPD were retrospectively analyzed. Continuous pathologic and perioperative metrics were compared and learning curve were defined with respect to operative time using CUSUM analysis. Seventeen LPD and 69 RPD were analyzed LPD had an inverted learning curve possibly accounting for proficiency attained during the surgeon's fellowship and acquisition of new skills coinciding with more complex patient selection. The learning curve for RPD had three phases: accelerated early experience (cases 1-10), skill consolidation (cases 11-40), and improvement (cases 41-69), marked by reduction in operative time. Compared to LPD, RPD had shorter operative time (379 vs 479 min, p < 0.005), less EBL (250 vs 500, p < 0.02), and similar R0 resection. RPD also had improved LOS (7 vs 10 days, p < 0.007), and lower rates of surgical site infection (10% vs 47%, p < 0.002), DGE (19% vs 47%, p < 0.03), and readmission (13% vs 41%, p < 0.02). Experience in LPD may shorten the learning curve for RPD. The gap in surgical quality and perioperative outcomes between LPD and RPD will likely widen as exposure to robotics in General Surgery, Hepatopancreaticobiliary, and Surgical Oncology training programs increase.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsHumansLearning CurvePancreaticoduodenectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesLaparoscopyLearning curvePancreaticoduodenectomyRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID38492057
OpenAlexW4392880233

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.