ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Learning curve of laparoscopic duodenum-preserving total pancreatic head resection: a single-center dual CUSUM and risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (LDPPHR) is a parenchyma-sparing alternative to pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and low-grade pancreatic head lesions. Although function-preserving, LDPPHR remains technically demanding, with clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) and other complications. The learning trajectory and risk-adjusted quality profile of LDPPHR-t remain incompletely defined, particularly under evolving case-mix and postoperative care pathways.
methodsConsecutive adults undergoing LDPPHR-t were analyzed as a strictly time-ordered series. Efficiency learning was assessed using unadjusted CUSUM curves for operative time (OT) and estimated blood loss (EBL). Quality and safety learning were evaluated using risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM) for TO failure and CR-POPF (ISGPS grade B/C), with expected risks derived from multivariable logistic regression. Learning phases were delineated at concordant turning regions of OT- and EBL-CUSUM and interpreted alongside both RA-CUSUM curves. Sensitivity analysis used modified textbook outcome (mTO), defined as TO excluding 30-day readmission.
resultsIn 120 cases, Phase 1 (1-30), Phase 2 (31-80), and Phase 3 (81-120) were identified. OT decreased from 270 min (IQR 246.2-297.5) to 203 min (IQR 180.2-248.2) (P < 0.001), and EBL from 110 mL (IQR 100-200) to 50 mL (IQR 46.2-100) (P < 0.001). Case-mix demonstrated late-phase risk drift toward higher fistula-risk anatomy. Crude TO and mTO rates did not differ significantly across phases, but components diverged, with 30-day readmission increasing in the late phase while prolonged LOS declined to zero. In risk-adjusted monitoring, both TO failure and mTO failure RA-CUSUM showed a late-phase downward shift, whereas CR-POPF RA-CUSUM showed no sustained late upward accumulation.
conclusionsA dual-track CUSUM and RA-CUSUM framework characterized LDPPHR-t learning under evolving anatomical complexity. Efficiency improved earlier, whereas risk-adjusted composite-endpoint stabilization emerged later. Concordant TO and mTO analyses support the robustness of the late-phase learning interpretation while clarifying the influence of post-discharge care pathways on crude composite-endpoint behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42141185What 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.