ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions
Learning Curve of Robotic Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Single-Center Experience.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted versus manual percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison between robot-assisted and manual percutaneous coronary intervention - an updated systematic review, meta-analysis, propensity-matched investigation, and trial sequential analysis.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating Patients' Profiles and Procedural Outcomes of Robotically Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Single Centre Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: current evidence and future directions.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Radiation-Free Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Myth or Reality?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Robot-Assisted Cardiovascular Interventions.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic percutaneous coronary intervention (R-PCI) has been shown to provide benefits to operators and patients when compared with traditional percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite being available for 16 years in the United States, utilization of R-PCI remains low. This may be because of an expected learning curve with this technology. We sought to describe the characteristics and magnitude of the learning curve with R-PCI. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing R-PCI (Corpath GRX-2) at a tertiary care center by a single operator were studied prospectively. Demographic, angiographic, and procedural variables were collected. The primary study endpoints included fluoroscopy time, procedure time, and contrast volume. The distributions of each of these variables were plotted against the case numbers in chronological sequence, and the best curve fits were identified. Using the best model, the slope of the relationships was analyzed. Flattening of the slope of these plots were considered suggestive of a learning effect. Results: A total of 546 R-PCI and 1654 traditional percutaneous coronary intervention procedures were studied; 22 crossovers to traditional percutaneous coronary intervention occurred. Most of the crossovers occurred in the first quartile of procedures; no crossovers occurred in the latter half of the cohort. Procedure time decreased as the procedure number increased, with the slope flattening at procedure number 50. Contrast volume decreased as experience increased, with a slope flattening at procedure number 30. Both parameters continued to decrease as experience increased. Fluoroscopy time demonstrated a flattening slope after procedure number 15. This likely is driven by the lower complexity by Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score remained stable over the procedure sequence, with no significant complexity change over the study period. Conclusion: The "learning effect" of R-PCI is observed with steep improvement in study metrics up to 50 procedures and a continuing improvement of lesser magnitude afterward.
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.