SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Understanding the learning curve in robotic-assisted cardiac surgery and its application on curriculum development - systematic narrative review.
Synthesis 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 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.
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since robotic-assisted cardiac surgery was established, the adoption rate was slow despite proven its efficacy and safety. Limited knowledge about the learning curve (LC) has led to lacking recognised training programme which in turn jeopardises patient safety and reduces the uptake rate. This study aims to review current literature, identify any knowledge gaps and quantify the LC. In addition, the study focuses on the application of LC knowledge on the curriculum development which has not been covered in the literature before. This systematic narrative review was conducted according to PRISMA-20 guideline. Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched from database inception to the 5th of February 2024. Eligible articles were those assessing LC in robotic-assisted cardiac surgery and reported in English. Among 24 studies which met the eligibility criteria (Table 1), 12 studies are for robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass, 9 for robotic-assisted mitral valve repair and 3 for robotic-assisted atrial septal defect repair. All studies were observational. Reporting LC exhibited substantial heterogeneity in terms of outcome variables and statistical analysis. None of the studies have quantified the surgeons' previous experience. Finally, having structured training programme is the most recommended method to mitigate the steep LC while creating standardised reporting system has been advised to decrease heterogeneity in the future studies. Current literature shows high heterogeneity in defining LC which creates challenges in developing safe curriculum. Nonetheless, adopting structured programme with good exposure to simulation sessions are deemed effective approach to reduce LC and improve patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41665799What 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.