ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Assessing the learning curve in robot-assisted intracorporeal colorectal anastomosis and transrectal extraction (NICE) procedure: from Initial Learning to Mastery.
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. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning curves in Versius-assisted colorectal surgery: a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis from a single center.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Cost analysis of robot NICE procedure versus open, laparoscopic, and robotic colorectal surgery: is there an economic benefit to natural orifice resection?Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Comment on "Assessing the learning curve in robot-assisted intracorporeal colorectal anastomosis and transrectal extraction (NICE) procedure: from Initial Learning to Mastery".Journal of robotic surgery · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The robotic NICE procedure is a novel minimally invasive approach in colorectal surgery, yet its learning curve remains undefined; this study aimed to define its distinct phases by analyzing operative time trends. A retrospective review of 170 consecutive NICE procedures performed by a single surgeon between May 2018 and August 2019 was undertaken. Skin-to-skin operative time was the learning curve surrogate and plotted with unadjusted and risk-adjusted cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses. Risk adjustment incorporated age, body mass index, ASA class, sex, prior abdominal surgery, diagnosis, anastomotic level, and the need for diverting loop ileostomy-used as a marker of case complexity rather than a direct time determinant. Phase-specific peri-operative outcomes were compared non-parametrically. Five proficiency phases were identified: Initial Learning (cases 1-10), Experienced (11-65), Second Learning (66-80), Advanced Experienced (81-124) and Mastery (125-170). The unadjusted CUSUM rose to + 342 min above the cohort mean by case 10, crossed the baseline at case 55, then gradually declined and plateaued at approximately -215 min by case 170. Risk-adjusted CUSUM displayed parallel inflection points (peak + 78 min, nadir -162 min), confirming that an easier case mix did not explain efficiency gains. Mean operative time fell from 248.8 ± 64.1 min in the first phase to approximately 185 min in Mastery, and inter-quartile variability narrowed from 125 to 59 min. Intraoperative complications (overall 12.4%), blood loss, organ/space surgical site infection, and 30-day morbidity did not differ across phases (p > 0.05). The robotic NICE procedure follows a five-phase learning curve, with true proficiency-and a 20% reduction in operative time-achieved after ~ 55 cases. Safety metrics remained similar across phases, confirming that efficiency gains reflect skill acquisition rather than easier case mix. These milestones can guide training for surgeons adopting the technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40526277What 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.