Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) is evolving as an important surgical approach in the field of colorectal surgery. We aimed to evaluate the learning curve for RALS procedures involving resections of the rectum and rectosigmoid.
A series of 50 consecutive RALS procedures were performed between August 2008 and September 2009. Data were entered into a retrospective database and later abstracted for analysis. The surgical procedures included abdominoperineal resection (APR), anterior rectosigmoidectomy (AR), low anterior resection (LAR), and rectopexy (RP). Demographic data and intraoperative parameters including docking time (DT), surgeon console time (SCT), and total operative time (OT) were analyzed. The learning curve was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.
The procedures performed for 50 patients (54% male) included 25 AR (50%), 15 LAR (30%), 6 APR (12%), and 4 RP (8%). The mean age of the patients was 54.4 years, the mean BMI was 27.8 kg/m2, and the median American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification was 2. The series had a mean DT of 14 min, a mean SCT of 115.1 min, and a mean OT of 246.1 min. The DT and SCT accounted for 6.3% and 46.8% of the OT, respectively. The SCT learning curve was analyzed. The CUSUMSCT learning curve was best modeled as a parabola, with equation CUSUMSCT in minutes equal to 0.73 × case number2 − 31.54 × case number − 107.72 (R = 0.93). The learning curve consisted of three unique phases: phase 1 (the initial 15 cases), phase 2 (the middle 10 cases), and phase 3 (the subsequent cases). Phase 1 represented the initial learning curve, which spanned 15 cases. The phase 2 plateau represented increased competence with the robotic technology. Phase 3 was achieved after 25 cases and represented the mastery phase in which more challenging cases were managed.
The three phases identified with CUSUM analysis of surgeon console time represented characteristic stages of the learning curve for robotic colorectal procedures. The data suggest that the learning phase was achieved after 15 to 25 cases.
- Tekkis PP, Fazio VW, Lavery IC, Remzi FH, Senagore AJ, Wu JS, Strong SA, Poloneicki JD, Hull TL, Church JM (2005) Evaluation of the learning curve in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. Ann Surg 241:262–268 CrossRef
- Taylor RH, Funda J, Eldridge B, Gomory S, Gruben K, LaRose D, Talamini M, Kavoussi L, Anderson J (1995) A telerobotic assistant for laparoscopic surgery. IEEE Eng Med Biol 14:279–288 CrossRef
- Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694 discussion 1695–1686 CrossRef
- Hashizume M, Tsugawa K (2004) Robotic surgery and cancer: the present state, problems, and future vision. Jpn J Clin Oncol 34:227–237 CrossRef
- Chaput de Saintonge DM, Vere DW (1974) Why don’t doctors use CUSUMs? Lancet 1:120–121
- Wohl H (1977) The CUSUM plot: its utility in the analysis of clinical data. N Engl J Med 296:1044–1045 CrossRef
- Biswas P, Kalbfleisch JD (2008) A risk-adjusted CUSUM in continuous time based on the Cox model. Stat Med 27:3382–3406 CrossRef
- Steiner SH, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Treasure T (2000) Monitoring surgical performance using risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts. Biostatistics 1:441–452 CrossRef
- Bell MC, Torgerson JL, Kreaden U (2009) The first 100 da Vinci hysterectomies: an analysis of the learning curve for a single surgeon. S D Med 62(91):93–95
- Tsao AK, Smaldone MD, Averch TD, Jackman SV (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: the first 100 patients—improving patient safety and outcomes. J Endourol 23:481–484 CrossRef
- Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ, Fazio VW (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639 CrossRef
- Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW (2005) Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections. Ann Surg 242:83–91 CrossRef
- Seike K, Koda K, Oda K, Kosugi C, Shimizu K, Miyazaki M (2009) Gender differences in pelvic anatomy and effects on rectal cancer surgery. Hepatogastroenterology 56:111–115
- Scheer A, Martel G, Moloo H, Sabri E, Poulin EC, Mamazza J, Boushey RP (2009) Laparoscopic colon surgery: does operative time matter? Dis Colon Rectum 52:1746–1752
- Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery
- Open Access
- Available under Open Access This content is freely available online to anyone, anywhere at any time.
Volume 25, Issue 3 , pp 855-860
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Cumulative sum analysis
- Learning curve
- Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Surgery, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA, 15240, USA
- 2. Division of Minimally Invasive Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, 7900 Fannin Street, Suite 2700, Houston, TX, 77054, USA
- 3. Division of Minimally Invasive Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Colorectal Surgical Associates Ltd, LLP, 7900 Fannin Street, Suite 2700, Houston, TX, 77054, USA