ArticleSurgery today2026
Impact of surgeon qualifications on the safety of Robot-Assisted surgery.
Article in Surgery today, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hugo RAS Versus Da Vinci in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Outcome Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate how surgeons' experience and qualifications in laparoscopic surgery influence safe implementation of robotic surgery.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 652 patients with colorectal cancer who underwent robotic surgery between 2016 and 2024 years. The patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent surgery performed by an expert surgeon (expert group, n = 571) and a non-expert surgeon (non-expert group, n = 81). Following propensity score matching (PSM) to minimize the possibility of any selection bias, 81 patients in each group were matched, and the clinical and perioperative features were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe number of procedures performed by non-experts has gradually increased over time, and surgeons have become progressively younger. Before matching, the non-expert group had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (expert vs. non-expert: 13.6% vs. 4.6%, p < 0.001) and included a higher proportion of colon tumors (36.4% vs. 54.3%, p = 0.002). However, after matching, no differences were observed between the groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the operative time, blood loss, or postoperative complications.
conclusionsProctored robotic surgery is considered to be safe. However, when non-expert surgeons perform robotic surgery, expert supervision is desirable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41661324What 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.