ArticleAnnals of surgery2024
Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery.
Article in Annals of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Learning curves in robotic and laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Updated overview of robotic hepatic parenchymal transection techniques: technical developments, international perspectives, and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Learning curve for lateral lymph node dissection in rectal cancer - a systematic review of literature.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a concise systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Multimodal analysis of the learning curve for pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy in a low-volume transplant center: a comparative cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Transition from laparoscopic to robotic hepatectomy within a minimally invasive liver surgery program: risk-adjusted learning curve assessment by multiple continuous outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- From IDEAL learning curve to team maturation: a decade of experience reducing conversion in laparoscopic liver resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Assessment of the learning curve of robotic liver resection using complexity-adjusted CUSUM analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Risk-adjusted learning curves for robotic suprapubic preperitoneal totally extraperitoneal (PeTEP) and extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) ventral hernia repair: a two-center cohort.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus open hepatectomy for IWATE expert-level liver resection: a risk-adjusted comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Single port robotic hepatectomy: an initial European experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Competency, Proficiency, and Mastery: Learning Curves for Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy at 16 International Expert Centers.Annals of surgery · 2026Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound for emergency pericardiocentesis: a multidimensional CUSUM analysis of the learning curve.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- The Hidden Cost of Precision: Financial, Training, and Environmental Trade-Offs in Robotic HPB Surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Reaching proficiency in robotic liver surgery in two high-volume European HPB centers.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted donor and recipient hepatectomy in liver transplantation: An umbrella review of clinical outcomes, surgical performance, and cost-effectiveness.World journal of transplantation · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted surgery improves short-term outcomes of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a referral-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- Nationwide implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: population-based analysis.BJS open · 2025Article
- Innovations and trends in hepatobiliary surgery education: Embracing technological advancements for enhanced surgical training.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- International Benchmark Values for Robotic Right Hepatectomy: Multicenter Study From 22 Expert Centers.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to analyze the learning curves of minimal invasive liver surgery(MILS) and propose a standardized reporting. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MILS offers benefits compared to open resections. For a safe introduction along the learning curve, formal training is recommended. However, definitions of learning curves and methods to assess it lack standardization.
methodsA systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in MILS. The primary outcome was the number needed to overcome the learning curve. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, and characterization of different learning phases(competency, proficiency and mastery).
results60 articles with 12'241 patients and 102 learning curve analyses were included. The laparoscopic and robotic approach was evaluated in 71 and 18 analyses and both approaches combined in 13 analyses. Sixty-one analyses (60%) based the learning curve on statistical calculations. The most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n=64), blood loss (n=54), conversion (n=42) and postoperative complications (n=38). Overall competency, proficiency and mastery were reached after 34 (IQR 19-56), 50 (IQR 24-74), 58 (IQR 24-100) procedures respectively. Intraoperative parameters improved earlier (operative time: competency to proficiency to mastery: -13%, 2%; blood loss: competency to proficiency to mastery: -33%, 0%; conversion rate (competency to proficiency to mastery; -21%, -29%), whereas postoperative complications improved later (competency to proficiency to mastery: -25%, -41%).
conclusionsThis review summarizes the highest evidence on learning curves in MILS taking into account different definitions and confounding factors. A standardized three-phase reporting of learning phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is proposed and should be followed.
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.