ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
More procedures, more efficiency: optimizing operating room during the phase of learning curve-experience of first 100 robotic bariatric procedures in a single center.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative outcomes of da Vinci SP versus da Vinci Xi platforms in robotic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Perceived learning curve of the nursing team using the da vinci XI surgical system in a Brazilian university hospital.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Prospective comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass: real-life analysis of procedural standardization and safety during the initial adoption phase.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery in medical tourism: a retrospective descriptive study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
- The real evolution: robotic surgery as a teaching tool, not a threat.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic bariatric surgery (RBS) is increasingly adopted worldwide. This study aims to evaluate the implementation and evolution of RBS at a high volume center over five years, focusing on operative time (OT), operating room (OR) efficiency, and cost outcomes. A prospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing elective RBS between July 2021 and March 2025 at ARNAS G. Brotzu, Cagliari. Metrics included OT, OR session time, and surgical volume. Variables analyzed included OT, OR session time, and surgical volume. Efficiency metrics such as overall OR efficiency, defined as OR session time/OT (Eff1), and robotic console utilization, defined as OR session time/console time (Eff2) were derived. Cost analysis incorporated OR activation time, surgeon and material costs. Statistical analyses included t-tests, Pearson's correlation, and linear regression. 100 robotic-assisted procedures were recorded. Robotic adoption increased from 4.06% in 2021 to 38.98% in 2025. A learning curve (LC) was identified, with a significant OT reduction after the first 34 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass cases (p = 0.001). Full robotic manual anastomosis showed a notable cost decrease in later cases (p < 0.0001). Increased surgical volume correlated with both reduced OT (r = - 0.58) and improved Eff1 (r = - 0.49, p = 0.005). However, Eff2 changes were not statistically significant (r = - 0.31, p = 0.09), underscoring the need for team-wide coordination. RBS in high-volume centers enhance OR efficiency and cost-effectiveness over time. The LC, surgical volume, and institutional workflows were key factors in optimizing efficiency, highlighting the importance of a collective LC for the entire surgical team.
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.