ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Learning curve-associated safety in minimally invasive esophagectomy using a time-based supervisory takeover strategy: a propensity score-weighted analysis of 603 VATS procedures.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is technically demanding with a prolonged learning curve, yet training opportunities must be preserved at high-volume centers without compromising patient safety. Whether supervised trainee participation under a structured, protocol-based curriculum with predefined intraoperative checkpoints can maintain perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes remains uncertain.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted including 603 consecutive patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATS) between 2015 and 2024 at a high-volume cancer center. Patients were categorized into supervisor-only and trainee-involved groups under a structured, protocol-based training system incorporating predefined intraoperative pacing and supervisor takeover criteria. Nine trainees participated over the study period; five completed ≥3 years of structured training (long-term trainees) and four were in-training (< 3 years). A stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was applied. The primary outcome was Textbook Outcome (TO). Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and long-term survival.
resultsAfter IPTW adjustment, baseline characteristics were well balanced. Trainee participation was not associated with inferior TO achievement (adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.82-1.60). No significant differences were observed in anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, or 90-day mortality. Overall survival and progression-free survival were equivalent between groups. Intraoperative supervisor takeover occurred in 16.1% of trainee cases (n = 51), all prompted by failure to meet a predefined step-level pacing checkpoint. Among long-term trainees, all five (100%) achieved the 300-min reference level, three of five (60%) achieved the 240-min level, and all obtained national endoscopic surgical skill certification. None of the four in-training trainees met either level.
conclusionsStructured supervision with predefined intraoperative checkpoints in VATS esophagectomy was not associated with inferior perioperative or long-term outcomes. Long-term trainees within a protocol-based framework achieved operative benchmarks and endoscopic surgical skill certification, supporting safety of a protocol-based supervisory takeover strategy during the learning curve of minimally invasive esophagectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42645344What 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.