ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2026
Initial Experience With Robotic Mitral Valve Replacement: Results From a Single Centre.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hospital costs and procedural learning curves of robotic mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Conventional Versus Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Replacement: A Retrospective Comparison of Sternotomy, Mini-Thoracotomy, and Periareolar Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Prior minimally invasive experience and the robotic mitral valve learning curve: a focused narrative review and the tactile-visual decoupling hypothesis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRobot-assisted mitral valve replacement has been shown to be comparable to conventional surgery in terms of safety and efficacy. Our institution has performed robot-assisted mitral valve replacement using the Da Vinci Surgical System for over a decade. This study aimed to evaluate the time-related evolution of clinical outcomes and the impact of the surgical learning curve.
methodsPatients who underwent robot-assisted mitral valve replacement between July 2013 and January 2024 were evaluated. All procedures were performed by 4 surgeons certified in robotic cardiac surgery, each with prior experience of more than 100 conventional mitral valve replacements. To assess the learning curve, cumulative sum analysis was conducted on cardiopulmonary bypass time and the Mitral Surgery Complexity Score.
resultsA total of 233 patients were included in the analysis. The mean patient age was 48.4 (13.9) years; 117 (50.2%) were male. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 170.3 (55.1) min. Cumulative sum analysis of cardiopulmonary bypass time revealed 3 phases: a learning phase (cases 1-27), a proficiency phase (cases 28-92), and a mastery phase (cases 93 onward). Mitral Surgery Complexity Scores decreased during the early phase, followed by an increase after case 92, indicating a transition towards more complex cases.
conclusionsRobot-assisted mitral valve replacement has a measurable learning curve, with surgical efficiency and case complexity evolving over time. Approximately 93 procedures appear necessary to achieve operative stability and to confidently expand indications to include more complex patients.
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.