ArticleJTCVS open2025
Exploring and analyzing learning curves in robotic-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical lung resections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in JTCVS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Implementation of a robot-assisted thoracic surgery program at a German center: analysis of the first 100 consecutive cases.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Learning curve analysis of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection performed by a novice thoracic surgeon.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted pulmonary resection with a periareolar assistant port: learning curve and propensity-matched comparison with the conventional-portal approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic thoracic surgery training in the UK and Republic of Ireland: national survey of trainee exposure, preparedness, and barriers.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- How robotic platforms have expanded the boundaries of minimally invasive surgery: a narrative review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Robot-assisted vs. laparoscopic-assisted surgery for choledochal cyst in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Uniportal versus multiportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery pulmonary resections: a propensity score-matched analysis.BMC 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: There has been a steady increase in the uptake of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery over recent years, with a necessary focus on training. The early learning curve has been extensively debated; however, a detailed understanding of how this extends as we gain experience has been poorly discussed. This study assesses the congruency and depth of the learning curve in robotic-assisted thoracic surgery of anatomical lung resection. Methods: All studies reporting a quantitative assessment of operator learning curve in robotic anatomical lung resection before March 1, 2024, were included. Two authors extracted data, and study quality was assessed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects modeling. Results: Twenty-nine studies including 106 surgeons were identified. A triphasic learning curve was identified with "competency" achieved at 20 (interquartile range, 13) cases, and "proficiency" at 60 (interquartile range, 37.5) cases. Weighted mean difference operating time between novice (P1) and proficiency (P2) was 34.1 minutes and between "competency" (P2) and "proficiency" (P3) was 17.5 minutes. This decreased with newer generations of robotic technology (Da Vinci Xi, weighted mean difference P1 vs P3: 42.3 [22.0, 62.5] vs S/Si, 57.4 [45.6, 69.2] minutes). Conclusions: The learning curve in anatomical lung resection is triphasic, with a reproducible extension beyond the initial proficiency phase. As robotic lung resection becomes more widespread, we must better understand the translation of this learning pattern among trainee surgeons to maintain excellence in clinical outcomes while facilitating training of the next generation.
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.