ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2025
Immersive robotic colorectal training in the United Kingdom is safe and efficient.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Structured robotic colorectal training in a non-tertiary NHS hospital: a 502-case consecutive cohort implementation study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWith increased utilisation of robotics in surgery, the demand for structured training is increasing. This paper presents the safety and efficacy profile of a robotic colorectal fellowship in the United Kingdom.
methodsThis is a retrospective study conducted in a district general hospital between 2019 and 2023. Procedures performed using the Da Vinci robot were divided into two cohorts, those performed by robotic fellows and those performed by consultant surgeons. Each fellowship lasted on average six months and at the end of the fellowship the trainee had completed the mandatory requirements to be certified as a robotic surgeon. The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of procedures performed by the fellows with those performed by consultants.
resultsOf the 224 robotic procedures recorded, 117 were performed by consultants and 107 by fellows. The median time to complete the procedure was 315min vs 257min for consultants and fellows, respectively. The average postoperative length of stay was 6 and 7 days, the anastomotic leak rate was 4.3% and 5.6% and reoperation rate was 11% and 9% for procedures performed by consultants and fellows, respectively. The median lymph nodal yield was 17 in both groups and the margin positivity rate (R1) resection rate was 7% and 4% (
conclusionIt is possible to safely train in robotic colorectal surgery without compromising patient safety, oncological outcomes or adversely affecting theatre efficiency.
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.