ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Efficacy of the "critical view/open book" concept for implementing standardized right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision-results from a series of minimally invasive surgical training courses.
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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the introduction of right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) the implementation of minimally invasive CME as standard of care still remains challenging. Among several established guidelines for minimally invasive CME, the "critical view/open book" concept has been developed to provide a stepwise standardization with safety checkpoints for teaching purposes. The present study evaluates this concept during its practical application in a large series of surgical training courses.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, seven consecutive 2-day surgical training courses based on the "critical view/open book" concept were offered to 125 attendees. Lectures on the rationale, surgical anatomy, techniques, and pitfalls of minimally invasive CME were followed by demonstration of predissected anatomical specimens. Tutored laparoscopic and robotic right hemicolectomies with CME were performed on body donors strictly adhering to the "critical view/open book" concept with subsequent quality assessment of resected specimens. A post-training questionnaire evaluated the "critical view/open book" concept related to its applicability, usefulness, efficacy, and adoption.
resultsThe "critical view/open book" concept could be fully/mostly applied by 85.9% of the attendees during the surgical training courses. The most valuable insights gained were related to the retrocolic fascial system, vascular variations including the gastropancreaticocolic trunk, and the extent of mesocolic excision. Although most attendees had no previous experience with the "critical view/open book" concept, 83.3% of resected specimens fulfilled the highest quality standard (type 0, Benz classification). Intention to adopt the "critical view/open book" concept into clinical practice was stated by 80.9% of those attendees not previously familiar with this concept.
conclusionThe "critical view/open book" concept applied in surgical training courses proved to be an efficient teaching tool for minimally invasive CME and, thus, may be integrated into training curricula. Follow-up studies are needed to confirm its impact on long-term adoption and clinical outcome.
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.