BACKGROUND: Robotic lobectomy is widely used for lung cancer treatment. So far, few studies have been performed to systematically analyze the learning curve. Our purpose is to define the learning curve to provide a training guideline of this technique. METHODS: A total of 208 consecutive patients with primary lung cancer who underwent robotic-assisted lobectomy by our surgical team were enrolled in this study. Baseline information and postoperative outcomes were collected. Learning curves were then analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Patients were divided into three groups according to the cut-off points of the learning curve. Intraoperative characteristics and short-term outcomes were compared among the three groups. RESULTS: CUSUM plots revealed that the docking time, console time and total surgical time in patients were 20, 34 and 32 cases, respectively. Comparison of the surgical time among the 3 phases revealed that the total surgical time (197.03±27.67, 152.61±21.07, 141.35±29.11 min, P<0.001), console time (150.97±26.13, 103.89±18.04, 97.49±24.80 min, P<0.001) and docking time (13.53±2.08, 11.95±1.10, 11.89±1.49 min, P<0.001) were decreased significantly. Estimated blood loss differed among groups (90.63±45.41, 87.63±59.84, 60.29±28.59 mL, P=0.001) and was associated with shorter operative time. There was no conversion or 30-day mortality. No significant differences were observed among other clinic-pathological characteristics among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: For a surgeon, the learning time of robotic lobectomy was in the 32th operation. For a bedside assistant, at least 20 cases were required to achieve the level of optimal docking.
BACKGROUND: Robotic lobectomy is widely used for lung cancer treatment. So far, few studies have been performed to systematically analyze the learning curve. Our purpose is to define the learning curve to provide a training guideline of this technique. METHODS: A total of 208 consecutive patients with primary lung cancer who underwent robotic-assisted lobectomy by our surgical team were enrolled in this study. Baseline information and postoperative outcomes were collected. Learning curves were then analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Patients were divided into three groups according to the cut-off points of the learning curve. Intraoperative characteristics and short-term outcomes were compared among the three groups. RESULTS: CUSUM plots revealed that the docking time, console time and total surgical time in patients were 20, 34 and 32 cases, respectively. Comparison of the surgical time among the 3 phases revealed that the total surgical time (197.03±27.67, 152.61±21.07, 141.35±29.11 min, P<0.001), console time (150.97±26.13, 103.89±18.04, 97.49±24.80 min, P<0.001) and docking time (13.53±2.08, 11.95±1.10, 11.89±1.49 min, P<0.001) were decreased significantly. Estimated blood loss differed among groups (90.63±45.41, 87.63±59.84, 60.29±28.59 mL, P=0.001) and was associated with shorter operative time. There was no conversion or 30-day mortality. No significant differences were observed among other clinic-pathological characteristics among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: For a surgeon, the learning time of robotic lobectomy was in the 32th operation. For a bedside assistant, at least 20 cases were required to achieve the level of optimal docking.
Entities:
Keywords:
da Vinci; learning curve; lung cancer surgery; robotic lobectomy; short-term outcomes
Authors: Franca M A Melfi; Gian Franco Menconi; A Massimo Mariani; Carlo Alberto Angeletti Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Giulia Veronesi; Bernardo G Agoglia; Franca Melfi; Patrick Maisonneuve; Raffaella Bertolotti; Paolo P Bianchi; Bernardo Rocco; Alessandro Borri; Roberto Gasparri; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: Innovations (Phila) Date: 2011-11
Authors: Giulia Veronesi; Domenico Galetta; Patrick Maisonneuve; Franca Melfi; Ralph Alexander Schmid; Alessandro Borri; Fernando Vannucci; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-12-28 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Mark Meyer; Farid Gharagozloo; Barbara Tempesta; Marc Margolis; Eric Strother; Douglas Christenson Journal: Int J Med Robot Date: 2012-09-18 Impact factor: 2.547
Authors: Nicolas C Buchs; François Pugin; Pascal Bucher; Monika E Hagen; Gilles Chassot; Pascale Koutny-Fong; Philippe Morel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Malak B Bokhari; Chirag B Patel; Diego I Ramos-Valadez; Madhu Ragupathi; Eric M Haas Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-08-24 Impact factor: 4.584