Skip to main content
Log in

Learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the rapid adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery, there has been growing interest in the pace at which surgeons gain competency, as it may aid in self-assessment or credentialing. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the learning curve of an expert laparoscopic colorectal surgeon who performed a variety of colorectal procedures robotically. This is a retrospective review of a prospective database of 111 subsequent colorectal procedures performed by a single colorectal surgeon. The cumulative summation technique (CUSUM) was used to construct a learning curve for robotic proficiency by analyzing total operative and console times. Postoperative outcomes including length of stay, 30-day complications, and 30-day readmission rates were evaluated. Chi-square and one-way ANOVA (including Kruskal–Wallis) tests were used to evaluate categorical and continuous variables. Our patient cohort had a mean age of 62.4, mean BMI of 26.9, and mean ASA score of 2.41. There were two conversions to open surgery. The CUSUM graph for console time indicated an initial decrease at case 13 and another decrease at case 83, generating 3 distinct performance phases: learning (n = 13), competence (n = 70), and mastery (n = 28). An interphase comparison revealed no significant differences in age, gender, BMI, ASA score, types of procedures, or indications for surgery between the three phases. Over the course of the study, both mean surgeon console time and median length of stay decreased significantly (p = 0.00017 and p = 0.016, respectively). Although statistically insignificant, there was a downward trend in total operative time and postoperative complication rates. Learning curves for robotic colorectal surgery are commonly divided into three performance phases. Our findings contribute to the construction of a reliable learning curve for the transition of colorectal surgeons to robotics. Furthermore, they may help guide the stepwise training and credentialing of new robotic surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Zelhart M, Kaiser AM (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: towards defining criteria to the right choice. Surg Endosc 32(1):24–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5796-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Catanzarite T, Tan-Kim J, Whitcomb E, Menefee S (2018) Ergonomics in surgery: a review. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 24(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Köckerling F (2014) Robotic vs. standard laparoscopic technique—What is better? Front Surg 1:15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2014.00015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB et al (2016) A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc 30(4):1576–1584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4381-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Guend H, Widmar M, Patel S et al (2017) Developing a robotic colorectal cancer surgery program: understanding institutional and individual learning curves. Surg Endosc 31(7):2820–2828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5292-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Park EJ, Kim CH, Cho MS et al (2014) Multidimensional analyses of the learning curve of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: 3-phase learning process comparison. Surg Endosc 28(10):2821–2831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3569-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sng KK, Hara M, Shin J et al (2013) The multiphasic learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery. Surg Endosc 27(9):3297–3307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-2909-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bokhari M, Patel C, Ramos-Valadez D, Ragupathi M, Haas E (2011) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 25(3):855–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1281-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Foo C, Law WL (2016) The learning curve of robotic-assisted low rectal resection of a novice rectal surgeon. World J Surg 40(2):456–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-3251-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaw D, Wright M, Taylor L, Bertelson N et al (2018) Robotic colorectal surgery learning curve and case complexity. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 28(10):1163–1168. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Parisi A, Scrucca L, Desiderio J, Gemini A, Guarino S et al (2017) Robotic right hemicolectomy: analysis of 108 consecutive procedures and multidimensional assessment of the learning curve. Surg Oncol 26(1):28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2016.12.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yamaguchi T, Kinugasa Y, Shiomi A et al (2015) Learning curve for robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: use of the cumulative sum method. Surg Endosc 29(7):1679–1685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3855-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jiménez-Rodríguez R, Díaz-Pavón JM, Portilla de Juan F et al (2013) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 28(6):815–821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-012-1620-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No relevant funding to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Not applicable.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yosef Nasseri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Yosef Nasseri is a key opinion leader for Intuitive. Isabella Stettler, Wesley Shen, Ruoyan Zhu, Arman Alizadeh, Anderson Lee, and Drs. Jason Cohen and Moshe Barnajian have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

This research study was conducted retrospectively from data obtained for clinical purposes. We consulted extensively with the IRB of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center who approved the study.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nasseri, Y., Stettler, I., Shen, W. et al. Learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery. J Robotic Surg 15, 489–495 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01131-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01131-1

Keywords

Navigation