Literature DB >> 23690208

Defining the learning curve for robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy.

Jonathan M Hernandez1, Francesca Dimou, Jill Weber, Khaldoun Almhanna, Sarah Hoffe, Ravi Shridhar, Richard Karl, Kenneth Meredith.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The expansion of robotic-assisted surgery is occurring quickly, though little is generally known about the "learning curve" for the technology with utilization for complex esophageal procedures. The purpose of this study is to define the learning curve for robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy with respect to operative time, conversion rates, and patient safety.
METHODS: We have prospectively followed all patients undergoing robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomy and compared operations performed at our institutions by a single surgeon in successive cohorts of 10 patients. Our measures of proficiency included: operative times, conversion rates, and complications. Statistical analyses were undertaken utilizing Spearman regression analysis and Mann-Whitney U test. Significance was accepted with 95 % confidence.
RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (41 male: 11 female) of mean age 66.2 ± 8.8 years underwent robotic-assisted esophagogastrectomies for malignant esophageal disease. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was administered to 30 (61 %) patients. A significant reduction in operative times (p <0.005) following completion of 20 procedures was identified (514 ± 106 vs. 397 ± 71.9). No conversions to open thoracotomy were required. Complication rates were low and not significantly different between any 10-patient cohort; however, no complications occurred in the final 10-patient cohort. There were no in-hospital mortalities.
CONCLUSIONS: For surgeons proficient in performing minimally-invasive esophagogastrectomies, the learning curve for a robotic-assisted procedure appears to begin near proficiency after 20 cases. Operative complications and conversions were infrequent and unchanged across successive 10-patient cohorts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23690208     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-013-2225-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  30 in total

1.  Review of open and minimal access approaches to oesophagectomy for cancer.

Authors:  P M Safranek; J Cubitt; M I Booth; T C B Dehn
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Robotics in thoracic surgery: applications and outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas A D'Amico
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 3.  Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  R J J Verhage; E J Hazebroek; J Boone; R Van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Minerva Chir       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: feasibility and safety of robotic assistance in the prone position.

Authors:  Dae Joon Kim; Woo Jin Hyung; Chang Young Lee; Jin-Gu Lee; Seok Jin Haam; In-Kyu Park; Kyung Young Chung
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Surya S A Y Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Kirsten W Maas; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Markus W Hollmann; Elly S M de Lange; H Jaap Bonjer; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Robot assisted transaxillary surgery (RATS) for the removal of thyroid and parathyroid glands.

Authors:  Christine S Landry; Elizabeth G Grubbs; G Stephen Morris; Nadine S Turner; F Christopher Holsinger; Jeffrey E Lee; Nancy D Perrier
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-10-14       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  First experiences with the da Vinci operating robot in thoracic surgery.

Authors:  J Bodner; H Wykypiel; G Wetscher; T Schmid
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.191

8.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Miguel Alvelo-Rivera; Percival O Buenaventura; Neil A Christie; James S McCaughan; Virginia R Litle; Philip R Schauer; John M Close; Hiran C Fernando
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Robotically assisted laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy.

Authors:  C A Galvani; M V Gorodner; F Moser; G Jacobsen; C Chretien; N J Espat; P Donahue; S Horgan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kamal Nagpal; Kamran Ahmed; Amit Vats; Danny Yakoub; David James; Hutan Ashrafian; Ara Darzi; Krishna Moorthy; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  24 in total

1.  Robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the elderly patient.

Authors:  Andrea Abbott; Ravi Shridhar; Sarah Hoffe; Khaldoun Almhanna; Matt Doepker; Nadia Saeed; Kenneth Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-02

Review 2.  Esophagectomy from then to now.

Authors:  Caitlin Takahashi; Ravi Shridhar; Jamie Huston; Kenneth Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2018-10

Review 3.  An appraisal of the learning curve in robotic general surgery.

Authors:  Luise I M Pernar; Faith C Robertson; Ali Tavakkoli; Eric G Sheu; David C Brooks; Douglas S Smink
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-04-14       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.

Authors:  I Kassite; T Bejan-Angoulvant; H Lardy; A Binet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomy.

Authors:  Kenneth Meredith; Paige Blinn; Taylor Maramara; Caitlin Takahashi; Jamie Huston; Ravi Shridhar
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a comment on the Ruijin hospital experience.

Authors:  David Pennywell; Inderpal S Sarkaria
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.895

7.  Prevention of intra-thoracic recurrent laryngeal nerve injury with robot-assisted esophagectomy.

Authors:  Kei Hosoda; Masahiro Niihara; Hideki Ushiku; Hiroki Harada; Mikiko Sakuraya; Marie Washio; Keishi Yamashita; Naoki Hiki
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Attaining Proficiency in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy While Maximizing Safety During Procedure Development.

Authors:  Inderpal S Sarkaria; Nabil P Rizk; Rachel Grosser; Debra Goldman; David J Finley; Amanda Ghanie; Camelia S Sima; Manjit S Bains; Prasad S Adusumilli; Valerie W Rusch; David R Jones
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug

9.  Perioperative outcomes associated with robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patient's undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Ravi Shridhar; Andrea M Abbott; Matthew Doepker; Sarah E Hoffe; Khaldoun Almhanna; Kenneth L Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2016-04

Review 10.  Esophageal surgery in minimally invasive era.

Authors:  Lapo Bencini; Luca Moraldi; Ilenia Bartolini; Andrea Coratti
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-01-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.