ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Short-term outcomes and learning curve of the double-bipolar method in 100 consecutive robot-assisted colorectal cancer resections: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. 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.
- Robot-Assisted Ileocecal Resection for Cecal Cancer with a Common Trunk of the Middle Colic and Ileocolic Arteries: A Case Report.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- A Case of Robot-Assisted Ileocecal Resection for Ascending Colon Cancer with Ileocolic Vein Flowing into the Jejunal Vein: Case Report.Surgical case reports · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The double bipolar method (DBM) using Maryland and fenestrated bipolar forceps has been advocated as a bipolar-centered energy strategy for robotic colorectal surgery; however, evidence beyond small case series is limited. This study therefore evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of DBM in a consecutive single-institution cohort. We retrospectively analyzed 100 consecutive robotic colorectal resections performed using DBM between June 2023 and September 2025. The primary endpoint was operative time and its learning curve, assessed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) and segmented regression. Key safety endpoints-anastomotic leakage and major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III)-were summarized descriptively. Secondary endpoints included blood loss, conversion, length of stay, and readmission. Sensitivity analyses employed risk-adjusted CUSUM. The mean operative time was 244 min, and the median blood loss was 3 mL. No cases required conversion to open surgery. Anastomotic leakage and major complications were observed in 0% and 2% of cases, respectively. Overall, vessel sealer use was 53%, declining from 100% (cases 1-49) to 7.8% (cases 50-100). CUSUM and segmented regression identified an inflection at case 49, after which operative efficiency improved without any increase in complications. DBM can be feasibly and safely implemented in robotic colorectal cancer surgery, demonstrating a manageable learning curve, minimal blood loss, and substantially reduced reliance on adjunct sealing devices once proficiency is achieved. These findings support DBM as a feasible, standardized, and potentially cost-aware energy strategy; however, its comparative cost-effectiveness and impact on operative time versus other energy approaches remain uncertain and require dedicated comparative studies. Therefore, multicenter studies evaluating long-term oncologic and economic outcomes are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41511669What 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.