Defining the Learning Curve of Robotic Thoracic Surgery: What Does It Take?

Overview

Journal Surg Endosc

Publisher Springer

Specialties Gastroenterology
General Surgery
Radiology

Date 2019 Aug 4

PMID 31376007

Citations 11

Authors

Alexandra D Power

Desmond M DSouza

Susan D Moffatt-Bruce

Robert E Merritt

Peter J Kneuertz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Controversy exists as to what constitutes a learning curve to achieve competency, and how the initial learning period of robotic thoracic surgery should be approached.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature published prior to December 2018 using PubMed/MEDLINE for studies of surgeons adopting the robotic approach for anatomic lung resection or thymectomy. Changes in operating room time and outcomes based on number of cases performed, type of procedure, and existing proficiency with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) were examined.

Results: Twelve observational studies were analyzed, including nine studies on robotic lung resection and three studies on thymectomy. All studies showed a reduction in operative time with an increasing number of cases performed. A steep learning curve was described for thymectomy, with a decrease in operating room time in the first 15 cases and a plateau after 15-20 cases. For anatomic lung resection, the number of cases to achieve a plateau in operative time ranged between 15-20 cases and 40-60 cases. All but two studies had at least some VATS experience. Six studies reported on experience of over one hundred cases and showed continued gradual improvements in operating room time.

Conclusion: The learning curve for robotic thoracic surgery appears to be rapid with most studies indicating the steepest improvement in operating time occurring in the initial 15-20 cases for thymectomy and 20-40 cases for anatomic lung resection. Existing data can guide a standardized robotic curriculum for rapid adaptation, and aid credentialing and quality monitoring for robotic thoracic surgery programs.

Citing Articles

Surgical management of thymic tumors: a narrative review with focus on robotic-assisted surgery.

Deckarm R, Flury D, Deckarm S, Ott S, Kocher G Mediastinum. 2025; 8():48.

PMID: 39781201 PMC: 11707441. DOI: 10.21037/med-24-17.

Evaluation of the Learning Curve Threshold in Robot-Assisted Lung Cancer Surgery: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

Pages P, Cottenet J, Madelaine L, Dherissard F, Abou-Hanna H, Bernard A Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24.

PMID: 39766120 PMC: 11674775. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244221.

Comparison of the Learning Curve between Uniportal and Robotic Thoracoscopic Approaches in Pulmonary Segmentectomy during the Implementation Period Using Cumulative Sum Analysis.

Igai H, Numajiri K, Ohsawa F, Nii K, Kamiyoshihara M Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(1).

PMID: 38201611 PMC: 10778519. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16010184.

Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Where Do We Stand?.

Berzenji L, Wen W, Verleden S, Claes E, Yogeswaran S, Lauwers P Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(17).

PMID: 37686557 PMC: 10487098. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174281.

Characteristics of the learning curve in robotic thoracic surgery in an emerging country.

de Rezende B, Assumpcao L, Haddad R, Terra R, Marques R J Robot Surg. 2023; 17(4):1809-1816.

PMID: 37083992 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01590-2.

References

Long H, Tan Q, Luo Q, Wang Z, Jiang G, Situ D . Thoracoscopic Surgery Versus Thoracotomy for Lung Cancer: Short-Term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017; 105(2):386-392. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.08.045. View

Toker A, Ozyurtkan M, Kaba E, Ayalp K, Demirhan O, Uyumaz E . Robotic anatomic lung resections: the initial experience and description of learning in 102 cases. Surg Endosc. 2015; 30(2):676-683. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4259-x. View

Gonsenhauser I, Abaza R, Mekhjian H, Moffatt-Bruce S . Developing a multidisciplinary robotic surgery quality assessment program. J Healthc Qual. 2013; 34(3):43-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1945-1474.2012.00205.x. View

Demmy T, Yendamuri S, DAmico T, Burfeind W . Oncologic Equivalence of Minimally Invasive Lobectomy: The Scientific and Practical Arguments. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 106(2):609-617. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.02.089. View

Li X, Wang J, Ferguson M . Competence versus mastery: the time course for developing proficiency in video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014; 147(4):1150-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.11.036. View

Hernandez J, Humphries L, Keeling W, Golkar F, Dimou F, Garrett J . Robotic lobectomy: flattening the learning curve. J Robot Surg. 2016; 6(1):41-5. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-011-0275-6. View

Ro C, DeRose Jr J, Connery C, Balaram S, Ashton Jr R . Three-year experience with totally endoscopic robotic thymectomy. Innovations (Phila). 2012; 1(3):111-4. DOI: 10.1097/01243895-200600130-00003. View

Downs S, Black N . The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998; 52(6):377-84. PMC: 1756728. DOI: 10.1136/jech.52.6.377. View

Fahim C, Hanna W, Waddell T, Shargall Y, Yasufuku K . Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lung resection: the first Canadian series. Can J Surg. 2017; 60(4):260-265. PMC: 5529157. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.005316. View

10.

Bendixen M, Kronborg C, Jorgensen O, Andersen C, Licht P . Cost-utility analysis of minimally invasive surgery for lung cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019; 56(4):754-761. DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezz064. View

11.

Meyer M, Gharagozloo F, Tempesta B, Margolis M, Strother E, Christenson D . The learning curve of robotic lobectomy. Int J Med Robot. 2012; 8(4):448-52. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1455. View

12.

Zhang Y, Liu S, Han Y, Xiang J, Cerfolio R, Li H . Robotic Anatomical Segmentectomy: An Analysis of the Learning Curve. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 107(5):1515-1522. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.11.041. View

13.

Veronesi G . Robotic lobectomy and segmentectomy for lung cancer: results and operating technique. J Thorac Dis. 2015; 7(Suppl 2):S122-30. PMC: 4419035. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.04.34. View

14.

Kamel M, Rahouma M, Stiles B, Nasar A, Altorki N, Port J . Robotic Thymectomy: Learning Curve and Associated Perioperative Outcomes. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017; 27(7):685-690. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2016.0553. View

15.

Estes S, Goldenberg D, Winder J, Juza R, Lyn-Sue J . Best Practices for Robotic Surgery Programs. JSLS. 2017; 21(2). PMC: 5508805. DOI: 10.4293/JSLS.2016.00102. View

16.

Rajaram R, Mohanty S, Bentrem D, Pavey E, Odell D, Bharat A . Nationwide Assessment of Robotic Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017; 103(4):1092-1100. PMC: 6714562. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.09.108. View

17.

Veronesi G, Agoglia B, Melfi F, Maisonneuve P, Bertolotti R, Bianchi P . Experience with robotic lobectomy for lung cancer. Innovations (Phila). 2012; 6(6):355-60. DOI: 10.1097/IMI.0b013e3182490093. View

18.

Cerfolio R, Bryant A, Minnich D . Starting a robotic program in general thoracic surgery: why, how, and lessons learned. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011; 91(6):1729-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.01.104. View

19.

Gallagher S, Abolhoda A, Kirkpatrick V, Saffarzadeh A, Thein M, Wilson S . Learning Curve of Robotic Lobectomy for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer by a Thoracic Surgeon Adept in Open Lobectomy. Innovations (Phila). 2018; 13(5):321-327. DOI: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000552. View

20.

Stewart L, Clarke M, Rovers M, Riley R, Simmonds M, Stewart G . Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement. JAMA. 2015; 313(16):1657-65. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.3656. View