ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Evaluation of 350 robotic liver resections performed by an early adopter in laparoscopic liver surgery: clinical outcomes and critical appraisal of the learning curve.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- From IDEAL learning curve to team maturation: a decade of experience reducing conversion in laparoscopic liver resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic hepatectomy across IWATE difficulty levels: a single-center experience of the first 100 cases.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic-assisted liver surgery is increasingly adopted, offering many advantages over conventional laparoscopy. This study evaluates perioperative outcomes, learning curves, instrument use, and cost price of the first 350 robotic liver resections (RLRs) performed by a high-volume HPB surgeon with extensive open and laparoscopic experience. Additionally, we assess whether established laparoscopic difficulty scoring systems can reliably predict surgical complexity and outcomes in robotic procedures.
methodsAll RLRs performed by a single surgeon from February 2020 to April 2025 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed, and learning curves for minor, anatomically major, and technically major resections were defined using cumulative sum analysis of operative time. Multivariate regression was used to assess the impact of case volume and preoperative difficulty scores on operative time and blood loss. And a descriptive analysis of instrument use, robotic techniques, and cost price is provided.
resultsOf the 350 RLRs, 147 were minor, 43 were anatomically major, and 160 were technically major resections. Median operative time was 145 min (IQR: 122-188), with median estimated blood loss of 30 mL (IQR: 20-90). Our conversion rate to open surgery was 0.6% (n = 2). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) occurred in 6%, with a median hospital stay of 3 days and a 90-day mortality rate of 1.1%. Learning plateaus were reached at 28 (minor) cases, 15 (anatomically major) cases, and 54 (technically major) cases. Case volume was not associated with operative time (p = 0.79) or blood loss (p = 0.93). In contrast, IWATE, Southampton, and IMM scores strongly predicted both (p < 0.001). A clear instrument preference was observed; most procedures required the use of 3-4 instruments, and the mean hospitalization cost was €5,408.50.
conclusionRobotic liver resection is safe, feasible, and cost-effective in experienced hands, with a short learning curve and strong predictive value from laparoscopic difficulty scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41034574What 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.