ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Defining the cardiac surgical learning curve: a longitudinal cumulative analysis of a surgeon's experience and performance monitoring in the first decade of practice.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "Comparison of Perioperative and Postoperative Outcomes between Single-Port Robotic Sacrocolpopexy and Multi-Port Approaches".International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- The robotic revolution in cardiac surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividual surgeons' learning curves are a crucial factor impacting patient outcomes. While many studies investigate procedure-specific learning curves, very few carried out a longitudinal analysis of individual cardiac surgeons over the course of their career. Given the evolving landscape of cardiac surgery with the introduction of transcatheter and robotic procedures, a contemporary evaluation of the cardiac surgical learning curve is justified and a method of personal performance monitoring is proposed in this study.
methodsA retrospective study of 1578 consecutive patients of a cardiac surgeon over ten years was undertaken. Risk adjustment was based on Euroscore. Cumulative risk adjusted morbidity (CRAM) charts of operative mortality, return to theatre and length of stay were constructed. Secondary endpoints included postoperative stroke and deep sternal wound infection. Change-point detection was applied to investigate temporal trends and identify when a significant change in outcome occurred. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess the influence of patient and system factors on operative mortality.
resultsPatient average risk profile was highest in the later years of practice. Cardiopulmonary bypass time remained stable from 86.5 to 92 min across the decade. The frequency of redo operations increased from 4.07% in the first two years of practice to 9.29% in the last two years. The proportion of aortic surgery increased from 6.98 to 10.58% of total cases. There was a significantly reduced operative mortality signalled at case 1220 with the change point identified around case 970.
conclusionThis prompts training colleges to consider application of sequential performance monitoring in surgical training programs, to confirm the progress of trainees and identify early evolving patterns that suggest support is required or milestones are being achieved.
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.