ArticleCureus2025
Charting Progress: Clinical Outcomes and the Learning Curve of Robotic Cholecystectomy in Indian Surgical Practice.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background With the growing use of robotic technology, robotic cholecystectomy (RC) is becoming more common. However, the effect of the learning curve on clinical outcomes in India is yet to be studied. This study addresses that gap by comparing short-term outcomes between two RC cohorts. Methods This study was conducted at a tertiary care center in India, involving 63 patients who underwent RC using the da Vinci Xi system. The patients were divided into two cohorts: cohort 1 included the first 31 cases, and cohort 2 comprised the next 32 cases, based on the learning curve. We evaluated short-term clinical outcomes both preoperatively and postoperatively. Results Patients undergoing RC were relatively young (mean age 45.10 ± 12.73 years) and predominantly female (68.25%). The average body mass index (BMI) was 30.67 ± 5.80 kg/m². The mean operative time of the study population was 37.16 ± 15.45 minutes, with port placement, docking, and console times averaging 1.03 ± 0.23, 0.81 ± 0.41, and 44.20 ± 18.66 minutes, respectively. Only one intraoperative complication (1.58%) occurred, and no conversions to open surgery were required. Postoperatively, there were no complications, bile duct injuries, or surgical site infections. The mean hospital stay was 1.90 ± 1.14 days. The pain scores decreased significantly over time at 6, 24, and 48 hours, and 7 days postoperatively, with no pain reported by day 14. Patients used an average of 2.65 ± 0.63 analgesics over 4.13 ± 1.55 days. Quality of life (QoL) scores improved steadily on postoperative days 3, 14, and 30, with no readmissions or disease recurrence. Cohort 2 showed a significantly reduced docking time (0.70 ± 0.25 vs. 0.93 ± 0.50 minutes, p=0.0269), indicating greater efficiency with experience. Conclusion RC is a feasible and effective option in India, offering improved short-term outcomes, faster recovery, and a learning curve of around 40 cases for experienced laparoscopic surgeons.
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.