Limited Laparoscopic Experience Research Articles

Structured training curricula for robotic colorectal surgery in China: does laparoscopic experience affect training effects?

Robotic surgery has been widely adopted for colorectal cancer (CRC). Many surgeons in China have completed structured training programs and have performed robotic colorectal surgeries. This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the training effects of structured training curricula in China for surgeons with different laparoscopic experiences during their initial implementation of robotic colorectal surgery. Ten surgeons from five high-volume centers participated in this retrospective study. The baseline characteristics, perioperative data, and pathological outcomes were compared between the first 15 robotic surgeries performed by five surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience (group A) and the first 15 robotic surgeries performed by five surgeons with limited laparoscopic experience (group B) at each center. Compared with group B, group A showed shorter operation time (200.9 vs. 254.2 min, P<0.001), less blood loss (100.0 vs. 150.0 mL, P=0.025), and a lower incidence of intraoperative complications (2.7% vs. 21.4%, P=0.015). The reoperation rate (1.3% vs. 5.3%, P=0.036) and postoperative complication rate (6.7% vs. 22.7%, P=0.025) were significantly lower in group A than in group B. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (e.g., age, sex, and tumor location) and pathological information (e.g., tumor stage, lymph node count, and tumor size) between the two groups. Radical resection (R0) was performed in all cases. In China, structured training curricula can help surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience make a smooth transition from laparoscopic to robotic surgery. However, the higher intraoperative and postoperative complication rates indicate that structured training curricula still require further refinement for surgeons with limited laparoscopic experience.

Going from Open Distal Pancreatectomies to Robotic Assisted. Experience from our First 50 Cases

Introduction: Until recently all pancreatic surgery in our tertiary high-volume center has been performed as open procedures. Recent studies have suggested that minimal invasive approach (laparoscopic or robotic-assisted) to distal pancreatektomies is safe and may offer advantages in the early postoperative period. With limited laparoscopic experience (from appendectomies, cholecystectomies etc.) we decided to do distal pancreatectomies with robotic approach.

Safety considerations in learning new procedures: a survey of surgeons

BackgroundThere exists a tension between surgical innovation and safety. The learning curve associated with the introduction of new procedures/technologies has been associated with preventable patient harm. Surgeon's perceptions regarding the safety of methods for learning new procedures/technologies are largely uncharacterized. Materials and methodsA survey was designed to evaluate surgeons' perceptions related to learning new procedures/technologies. This included clinical vignettes across two domains: (1) experience with an operation (e.g., colectomy) and (2) experience with a technology (e.g., laparoscopy). This study also focuses on a surgeon's perceptions of existing credentialing/privileging requirements. Participants were faculty surgeons (n = 150) at two large Midwestern academic health centers. ResultsSurvey response rate was 77% (116/150). 69% of respondents believed the processes of credentialing/privileging is “far too relaxed” or “too relaxed” for ensuring patient safety. Surgeons most commonly indicated a mini-fellowship is required to learn a new laparoscopic procedure. However, that requirement differed based on a surgeon's prior experience with laparoscopy. For example, to learn laparoscopic colectomy, 35% of respondents felt a surgeon with limited laparoscopic experience should complete a mini-fellowship, whereas 3% felt this was necessary if the surgeon had extensive laparoscopic experience. In the latter scenario, most respondents felt a surgeon should scrub in cases performed by an expert (38%) or perform cases under a proctor's supervision (33%) when learning laparoscopic colectomy. ConclusionsMany surgeons believe existing hospital credentialing/privileging practices may be too relaxed. Moreover, surgeons believe the “one-size-fits-all” approach for training practicing surgeons may not protect patients from unsafe introduction of new procedures/technologies.

Pediatric Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty.

The laparoscopic approach to the pyeloplasty procedure has proven to be safe and effective in the pediatric population. Multiple studies have revealed outcomes comparable to the open approach. However, a major drawback to laparoscopy is the technical challenge of precise suturing in the small working space in children. The advantages of robotic surgery when compared to conventional laparoscopy have been well established and include motion scaling, enhanced magnification, 3-dimensional stereoscopic vision, and improved instrument dexterity. As a result, surgeons with limited laparoscopic experience are able to more readily acquire robotic surgical skills. Limitations of the robotic platform include its high costs for acquisition and maintenance, as well as the need for additional robotic surgical training. In this article, we review the current status of the robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty, including a brief history, comparative outcomes, cost considerations, and training.

Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery.

Standard surgical training has traditionally been one of apprenticeship, where the surgical trainee learns to perform surgery under the supervision of a trained surgeon. This is time-consuming, costly, and of variable effectiveness. Training using a virtual reality simulator is an option to supplement standard training. Virtual reality training improves the technical skills of surgical trainees such as decreased time for suturing and improved accuracy. The clinical impact of virtual reality training is not known. To assess the benefits (increased surgical proficiency and improved patient outcomes) and harms (potentially worse patient outcomes) of supplementary virtual reality training of surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded until July 2012. We included all randomised clinical trials comparing virtual reality training versus other forms of training including box-trainer training, no training, or standard laparoscopic training in surgical trainees with little laparoscopic experience. We also planned to include trials comparing different methods of virtual reality training. We included only trials that assessed the outcomes in people undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Two authors independently identified trials and collected data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using Review Manager 5 analysis. For each outcome we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat analysis. We included eight trials covering 109 surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience. Of the eight trials, six compared virtual reality versus no supplementary training. One trial compared virtual reality training versus box-trainer training and versus no supplementary training, and one trial compared virtual reality training versus box-trainer training. There were no trials that compared different forms of virtual reality training. All the trials were at high risk of bias. Operating time and operative performance were the only outcomes reported in the trials. The remaining outcomes such as mortality, morbidity, quality of life (the primary outcomes of this review) and hospital stay (a secondary outcome) were not reported. Virtual reality training versus no supplementary training: The operating time was significantly shorter in the virtual reality group than in the no supplementary training group (3 trials; 49 participants; MD -11.76 minutes; 95% CI -15.23 to -8.30). Two trials that could not be included in the meta-analysis also showed a reduction in operating time (statistically significant in one trial). The numerical values for operating time were not reported in these two trials. The operative performance was significantly better in the virtual reality group than the no supplementary training group using the fixed-effect model (2 trials; 33 participants; SMD 1.65; 95% CI 0.72 to 2.58). The results became non-significant when the random-effects model was used (2 trials; 33 participants; SMD 2.14; 95% CI -1.29 to 5.57). One trial could not be included in the meta-analysis as it did not report the numerical values. The authors stated that the operative performance of virtual reality group was significantly better than the control group. Virtual reality training versus box-trainer training: The only trial that reported operating time did not report the numerical values. In this trial, the operating time in the virtual reality group was significantly shorter than in the box-trainer group. Of the two trials that reported operative performance, only one trial reported the numerical values. The operative performance was significantly better in the virtual reality group than in the box-trainer group (1 trial; 19 participants; SMD 1.46; 95% CI 0.42 to 2.50). In the other trial that did not report the numerical values, the authors stated that the operative performance in the virtual reality group was significantly better than the box-trainer group. Virtual reality training appears to decrease the operating time and improve the operative performance of surgical trainees with limited laparoscopic experience when compared with no training or with box-trainer training. However, the impact of this decreased operating time and improvement in operative performance on patients and healthcare funders in terms of improved outcomes or decreased costs is not known. Further well-designed trials at low risk of bias and random errors are necessary. Such trials should assess the impact of virtual reality training on clinical outcomes.

Can the learning of laparoscopic skills be quantified by the measurements of skill parameters performed in a virtual reality simulator?

To ensure patient safety and surgical efficiency, much emphasis has been placed on the training of laparoscopic skills using virtual reality simulators. The purpose of this study was to determine whether laparoscopic skills can be objectively quantified by measuring specific skill parameters during training in a virtual reality surgical simulator (VRSS). Ten medical students (with no laparoscopic experience) and ten urology residents (PGY3-5 with limited laparoscopic experience) were recruited to participate in a ten-week training course in basic laparoscopic skills (camera, cutting, peg transfer and clipping skills) on a VRSS. Data were collected from the training sessions. The time that individuals took to complete each task and the errors that they made were analyzed independently. The mean time that individuals took to complete tasks was significantly different between the groups (p < 0.05), with the residents being faster than the medical students. The residents' group also completed the tasks with fewer errors. The majority of the subjects in both groups exhibited a significant improvement in their task completion time and error rate. The findings in this study demonstrate that laparoscopic skills can be objectively measured in a VRSS based on quantified skill parameters, including the time spent to complete skill tasks and the associated error rate. We conclude that a VRSS is a feasible tool for training and assessing basic laparoscopic skills.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: evolution and recent advances

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is emerging as a viable complement to traditional laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. As a relatively new technique, the techniques and technologies employed during RAPN continue to evolve. In the present article, we provide an overview of the evolution of robot-assisted renal surgery, and highlight the recent advances that have helped to bring RAPN to the fore. The learning curve for RAPN appears to be slight, and technical proficiency may be quickly achieved, even for those with limited laparoscopic experience. Recent advances include improvements in ergonomics of the robotic system itself, as well as the introduction of sliding-clip renorrhaphy, early unclamping techniques, and off-clamp techniques. Early-to-intermediate outcomes are very promising, demonstrating short warm ischemic times, and a low rate of complication and recurrence. Disadvantages to the approach include substantial cost, as well as increased reliance upon the assistant to perform critical maneuvers. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy appears to be a safe and efficacious technique for the surgical management of localized renal malignancy. Recent developments have focused upon reducing ischemic insult, as well as decreasing reliance upon the assistant.

Estudio prospectivo que compara laparoscopia y cirugía abierta para el tratamiento de cálculos ureterales impactados

Introduction and objectives To investigate two ureterolithotomy approaches for treatment of large and impacted upper ureteral stones, we prospectively evaluated the perioperative features of consecutive patients submitted to ureterolithotomy following failure of endourological treatment. Methods Of the 110 patients included in the study, 34 underwent laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Patients were divided into three ureterolithotomy subgroups (group A, 76 open procedures; group B, 16 transperitoneoscopies and group C, 19 retroperitoneoscopies). All procedures were performed into a urology residency program. Results The patients’ age, sex, ASA classification and stones characteristics showed no significant difference between the groups. Overall, complication rates and the operation times recorded were similar. One patient had bilateral stones and both sides were managed in a single transperitoneoscopy procedure. Three retroperitoneoscopies were converted to an open surgery due technical difficulties. A prolonged urinary leakage occurred in 3/35 cases (8.5%) where 2 patients were treated by placing a ureteral catheter. Both laparoscopic groups have significantly less analgesia requirements and shorter hospitalization (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). All patients were stone-free in the follow-up 1-month visit. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first prospective comparison of laparoscopic and open ureterolithotomy in a laparoscopic training scenario. Even though these procedures were performed by limited laparoscopic experience urologists, laparoscopy offered significant advantages over traditional open ureterolithotomy, resulting in improved analgesia, shorter hospital stays and similar complication rates.

Can everyone achieve proficiency with the laparoscopic technique? Learning curve patterns in technical skills acquisition

Background The study was carried out to determine the learning curve patterns for basic laparoscopic technical skills. Methods Thirty-seven surgical residents with limited laparoscopic experience performed 10 repetitions of 6 tasks on a virtual-reality trainer (MIST-VR) with standardized distribution of practice. Assessment was based on time, errors, and economy of motion as measured by MIST-VR. Proficiency levels were established by testing experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Results Four learning curve patterns were determined. Surgeons in group 1 (5.4%) demonstrated proficiency from the beginning; group 2 (70.3%) achieved predefined expert criteria between 2 and 9 repetitions; group 3 (16.2%) demonstrated improvement but was unable to achieve proficiency within 10 repetitions. Group 4 (8.1%) underperformed and showed no tendency of skills improvement, reflecting a group of subjects who probably are unable to learn laparoscopic technique. Conclusions The results indicated that a group of subjects could not reach proficiency in the psychomotor skills relevant for laparoscopy. We believe that this is an important issue that should be addressed in future research.

Does 3-Dimensional (3-D) visualization improve the quality of assistance during robotic radical prostatectomy?

3-Dimensional (3-D) visualization by the surgeon is considered to be one of the major advantages of robotic prostatectomy. We undertook this study to see if passing on this technology to the surgical assistants would improve the efficiency of their assistance. The study was conducted in consecutive patients undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy by the same team, in one month at our center. A 3-D head mounted device (HMD) was used by the left and/or right assistant. Video recording from these patients were studied by a blinded observer with prior training in laparoscopic surgery for the efficiency of laparoscopic moves by the two assistants. These moves were scored on a point scoring system from 0 to 100 with 100 signifying the best possible performance. After exclusions, 26 videos were available for review. Each patient had a right and left-sided assistant. The right-sided assistant had prior experience in Laparoscopic Urology, and the left-sided assistant had a relatively limited laparoscopic experience. The mean scores for the left assistant improved from 76.3 to 84.6 with the use of 3-D visualization (p < 0.002), while the improvement for the right assistant was from 84.1 to 86.9 (NS). The use of 3-D visualization possibly improves the efficiency of assistance during robotic radical prostatectomies, for the assistant with limited experience in laparoscopic surgery. Because of the high-quality 3-D vision provided, these HMDs have the potential to be used as teaching aids in the robotic lab.

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of virtual reality training for laparoscopic surgery

Surgical training has traditionally been one of apprenticeship. The aim of this review was to determine whether virtual reality (VR) training can supplement and/or replace conventional laparoscopic training in surgical trainees with limited or no laparoscopic experience. Randomized clinical trials addressing this issue were identified from The Cochrane Library trials register, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, grey literature and reference lists. Standardized mean difference was calculated with 95 per cent confidence intervals based on available case analysis. Twenty-three trials (mostly with a high risk of bias) involving 622 participants were included in this review. In trainees without surgical experience, VR training decreased the time taken to complete a task, increased accuracy and decreased errors compared with no training. In the same participants, VR training was more accurate than video trainer (VT) training. In participants with limited laparoscopic experience, VR training resulted in a greater reduction in operating time, error and unnecessary movements than standard laparoscopic training. In these participants, the composite performance score was better in the VR group than the VT group. VR training can supplement standard laparoscopic surgical training. It is at least as effective as video training in supplementing standard laparoscopic training.

Does box model training improve surgical dexterity and economy of movement during virtual reality laparoscopy? A randomised triala

Laparoscopic box model trainers have been used in training curricula for a long time, however data on their impact on skills acquisition is still limited. Our aim was to validate a low cost box model trainer as a tool for the training of skills relevant to laparoscopic surgery. Randomised, controlled trial (Canadian Task Force Classification I). University Hospital. Sixteen gynaecologic residents with limited laparoscopic experience were randomised to a group that received a structured box model training curriculum, and a control group. Performance before and after the training was assessed in a virtual reality laparoscopic trainer (LapSim and was based on objective parameters, registered by the computer system (time, error, and economy of motion scores). Group A showed significantly greater improvement in all performance parameters compared with the control group: economy of movement (p=0.001), time (p=0.001) and tissue damage (p=0.036), confirming the positive impact of box-trainer curriculum on laparoscopic skills acquisition. Structured laparoscopic skill training on a low cost box model trainer improves performance as assessed using the VR system. Trainees who used the box model trainer showed significant improvement compared to the control group. Box model trainers are valid tools for laparoscopic skills training and should be implemented in the comprehensive training curricula in gynaecology.

Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in a University Teaching Hospital: Experience after the First 600 Cases

ObjectivesTo review features of initial and subsequent learning curves of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). MethodsA total of 604 patients underwent LRP. Two surgeons started the programme. After the completion of the first 103 cases, three generations of surgeons entered the programme stepwise. Thirty-four patients were operated by four different surgeons, with limited laparoscopic experience, and were considered as a single, separate group for analysis. Patient data, operating data, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and positive surgical margins were analysed chronologically for the whole group and for each surgeon. ResultsMean operating time (201.5±68.0min), estimated blood loss (346.7±351.7ml), transfusion rate (11.3%), and intraoperative complications diminished with surgical experience and were less in the newer generations of surgeons (p<0.001). However, postoperative complications, prolonged hospital stay, and late removal of the drainage tube occurred significantly more frequently in surgeons who just performed LRP procedures occasionally. Postoperative pain decreased significantly with increasing surgical experience (p<0.05), but mean hospital stay (3.5 d) did not change in the whole series. Positive margin rate varied greatly among surgeons (overall positive margin rates pT2=19.2%, pT3=53.2%). There was a trend towards reduction of positive surgical margins in pT2 cases in most surgeons as experience grew. The combined retrograde-descending technique was associated with higher rates of positive margins at the apex (11.4% combined technique vs. 6.7% descending technique), whereas positive margins at the posterolateral region were more frequent in the descending technique (9% combined technique vs. 12.5% descending technique). ConclusionsExperience gained by the first generation of surgeons helped newer surgeons reduce the duration and morbidity of their corresponding learning curves.

Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in a center with limited laparoscopic experience

Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in a center with limited laparoscopic experience

Robotic pyeloplasty.

In addition to the classic open surgery, a variety of minimally invasive therapeutic options have been developed for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction, including an endoscopic antegrade or retrograde ureteropelvic junction obstruction visually controlled incision or radioscopically controlled Acucise (Applied Medical, Laguna Hills, CA), which does not share the high success rate that results from open-surgical dismembered pyeloplasty. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty, which duplicates the open technique and differs only by the mode of access, has proven to have positive results when performed by experts, but remains a demanding technique that requires a long learning curve. Providing a three-dimensional vision, an unprecedented control of the endocorporeal instruments, and an ergonomic surgeon's position, robots may allow urologists with limited laparoscopic experience to rapidly master the endocorporeal management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. They likely will propel minimally invasive urology forward in the next several years.