Systematic review of live surgical demonstrations and their effectiveness on training

Remote cadaveric minimally invasive surgical training

Objective

The aim of the study is to discuss the efficacy of live vs. remote cadaver surgical training (CST) for minimally invasive surgery (MIS).

Methods

A cohort of 30 interns in their first and second years of training were divided into three groups: live observers (n = 12), live participants (n = 6), and remote observers: (n = 12). The interns had the opportunity to either observe or actively participate in two different surgical procedures, namely, laparoscopic lower anterior resection, performed by a colorectal surgical team, and laparoscopic fundoplication, performed by a pediatric surgical team. The procedures were conducted either at a base center or at a remote center affiliated with the institute. Some of the interns interacted directly with the surgical teams at the base center, and others interacted indirectly with the surgical teams from the remote center. All interns were administered questionnaires before and after completion of the CST in order to assess their understanding of various aspects related to the operating room layout/instruments (called "design"), accessing the surgical field (called "field"), understanding of anatomic relations (called "anatomy"), their skill of dissection (called "dissection"), ability to resolve procedural/technical problems (called "troubleshooting"), and their skill in planning surgery (called "planning") according to their confidence to operate using the following scale: 1 = not confident to operate independently; 4 = confident to operate with a more senior trainee; 7 = confident to operate with a peer; and 10 = confident to operate with a less experienced trainee. A p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

All scores improved after CST at both the base and remote centers. The following significant increases were observed: for remote observers: "field" (2.67→4.92; p < .01), "anatomy" (3.58→5.75; p < .01), "dissection" (3.08→4.33; p = .01), and "planning" (3.08→4.33; p < .01); for live observers: "design" (3.75→6.17; p < .01), "field" (2.83→5.17; p < .01), "anatomy" (3.67→5.58; p < .01), "dissection" (3.17→4.58; p < .01), "troubleshooting" (2.33→3.67; p < .01), and "planning" (2.92→4.25; p < .01); and for live participants: "design" (3.83→6.33; p = .02), "field" (2.83→6.83; p < .01), "anatomy" (3.67→5.67; p < .01), "dissection" (2.83→6.17; p < .01), "troubleshooting" (2.17→4.17; p < .01), and "planning" (2.83→4.67; p < .01). Understanding of "design" improved significantly after CST in live observers compared with remote observers (p < .01). Understanding of "field and "dissection" improved significantly after CST in live participants compared with live observers (p = .01, p = .03, respectively). Out of the 12 remote observers, 10 participants (83.3%) reported that interacting with surgical teams was easy because they were not on-site.

Conclusions

Although all the responses were subjective and the respondents were aware that observation was inferior to hands-on experience, the results from both centers were equivalent, suggesting that remote learning could potentially be viable when resources are limited.

Live Virtual Surgery and Virtual Reality in Surgery: Potential Applications in Hand Surgery Education

Accelerated in part by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, medical education has increasingly moved into the virtual sphere in recent years. Virtual surgical education encompasses several domains, including live virtual surgery and virtual and augmented reality. These technologies range in complexity from streaming audio and video of surgeries in real-time to fully immersive virtual simulations of surgery. This article reviews the current use of virtual surgical education and its possible applications in hand surgery. Applications of virtual technologies for preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance, as well as care in underresourced settings, are discussed. The authors describe their experience creating a virtual surgery subinternship with live virtual surgeries. There are many roles virtual technology can have in surgery, and this review explores potential value these technologies may have in hand surgery.

Graded operative autonomy in emergency appendectomy mirrors case-complexity: surgical training insights from the SnapAppy prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical skill, a summation of acquired wisdom, deliberate practice and experience, has been linked to improved patient outcomes. Graded mentored exposure to pathologies and operative techniques is a cornerstone of surgical training. Appendectomy is one of the first procedures surgical trainees perform independently. We hypothesize that, given the embedded training ethos in surgery, coupled with the steep learning curve required to achieve trainer-recognition of independent competency, 'real-world' clinical outcomes following appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis are operator agnostic. The principle of graded autonomy matches trainees with clinical conditions that they can manage independently, and increased complexity drives attending input or assumption of the technical aspects of care, and therefore, one cannot detect an impact of operator experience on outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a subgroup analysis of the SnapAppy international time-bound prospective observational cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov Trial #NCT04365491), including all consecutive patients aged ≥ 15 who underwent appendectomy for appendicitis during a three-month period in 2020-2021. Patient- and surgeon-specific variables, as well as 90-day postoperative outcomes, were collected. Patients were grouped based on operating surgeon experience (trainee only, trainee with direct attending supervision, attending only). Poisson and quantile regression models were used to (adjusted for patient-associated confounders) assess the relationship between surgical experience and postoperative complications or hospital length of stay (hLOS), respectively, adjusted for patient-associated confounders. The primary outcome of interest was any complications within 90 days.

RESULTS

A total of 4,347 patients from 71 centers in 14 countries were included. Patients operated on by trainees were younger (Median (IQR) 33 [24-46] vs 38 [26-55] years, p < 0.001), had lower ASA classifications (ASA ≥ 3: 6.6% vs 11.6%, p < 0.001) and fewer comorbidities compared to those operated on by attendings. Additionally, trainees operated alone on fewer patients with appendiceal perforation (AAST severity grade ≥ 3: 8.7% vs 15.6%, p < 0.001). Regression analyses revealed no association between operator experience and complications (IRR 1.03 95%CI 0.83-1.28 for trainee vs attending; IRR 1.13 95%CI 0.89-1.42 for supervised trainee vs attending) or hLOS.

CONCLUSION

The linkage of case complexity with operator experience within the context of graduated autonomy is a central tenet of surgical training. Either subconsciously, or by design, patients operated on by trainees were younger, fitter and with earlier stage disease. At least in part, these explain why clinical outcomes following appendectomy do not differ depending on the experience of the operating surgeon.

Safety and effectiveness of live broadcast of surgical procedures: systematic review

Introduction

Live Broadcast of Surgical Procedures (LBSP) has gained popularity in conferences and educational meetings in the past few decades. This is due to rapid advancement in both Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) that enable transmission of the entire operative field and transmission ease and technology to help broadcast the operation to a live audience. The aim of this study was to update the evidence with specific emphasis on the patient safety issues related to LBSP in MIS.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was performed using Medline, Embase and Pubmed using defined search terms related to LBSP in educational events across all surgical specialities, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We also consolidated the prior guidelines and position statements on this topic. Outcomes included reports on the educational value of LBSP as well as patient safety outcomes and ethical issues that were captured by clinical outcomes.

Results

A total 1230 abstracts were identified with 27 papers meeting the inclusion criteria (13 original articles and 14 position statements/guidelines). All studies highlighted the educational benefits of LBSP but without clear measure of these benefits. Clinical outcomes were not compromised in 9 studies but were inferior in the remaining 4, including lower completion rate of endoscopic surgery and higher rate of re-operation. Only nine studies complied with dedicated consent forms for LBSP with no consistent approach of reporting on maintaining patient confidentiality during LBSP.

There was a lack of recommendation on standardised approach of reporting on LBSP including the outcomes across the 14 published guidelines and positions statements.

Conclusions

Live Broadcast of Surgical Procedures can be of educational value but patient safety may be compromised. A standardised framework of reporting on LBSP and its outcomes is required from an ethical and patient safety perspective.

PROSPERO registration

CRD42021256901.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09072-6.

Ten years of live surgical broadcast at Charité-MAYO conferences (2010–2019): a systematic evaluation of the surgical outcome

Objective

The international Charité-MAYO Conference aims to promote international dialog on diagnostics, management, scientific breakthroughs, and state-of-the-art surgical procedures in gynecology and gynecologic oncology and senology. Live surgeries are a fundamental tool of interdisciplinary and international exchange of experts in their respective fields. Currently, there is a controversial and emotional debate about the true value, risks, and safety of live surgical broadcasts. The aim of the current study is to analyze peri-operative risks in patients who were operated live during the Charité-MAYO Conferences.

Methods

Live surgeries were performed by the core Charité team consisting of gynecologic oncologic surgeons, breast and plastic surgeons, partly in collaboration with visiting gynecologic oncologic surgeons. We performed a retrospective analysis of live surgeries performed during seven Charité-MAYO Conferences from 2010 to 2019 held in Berlin, Germany. Patients’ files and tumor databases were analyzed as required and patients were contacted to update their long-term follow-up.

Results

Sixty-nine patients who were operated live were included. The types of surgery were as follows: urogynecologic procedures (n=13), breast surgery (n=21), and gynecologic oncology surgery for ovarian, uterine, vulvar or cervical cancer (n=35). Peri-operative complications were assessed according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. Despite a high rate of complete resection and the high frequency of multivisceral procedures, the rate of peri-operative complications was within the range published in the literature. Time of surgery and length of intensive unit care and hospital stay did not differ from data acquired at the home institution.

Conclusions

Based on our analysis, live surgeries appear to be safe when performed within a multidisciplinary setting without an increase in surgical morbidity and mortality compared with historical controls and without compromise of patients’ outcome. This is the first analysis of its kind to set the basis for patient information and consent for this type of surgeries.

Live Surgery: A retrospective study on the outcomes and complications of 7 orthopedic live surgery events

INTRODUCTION

Live surgery has always been an invaluable part of medical education. Live Surgery Events (LSE) have recently been criticized in France, arguing that unnecessary risks have been placed on the patients.

HYPOTHESIS

We want to report our experience in organizing the last 7 shoulder LSE over the past 12 years focusing on the results and complications during and after the surgeries performed during these courses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

190 patients benefited from live shoulder surgery between 2005 and 2017. 11 of them were lost to follow up, thus 179 patients were included. The mean follow-up was 7,5 years for the instability group, 6,7 years for the rotator cuff group, 7,5 years for the arthroplasty group and 6,8 years for the nerve group. This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. We report the epidemiology of the surgeries perfomed and analyzed the patient outcomes: peri and postoperative complications. We evaluated the educational benefit for the attendees of this shoulder LSE through a questionnaire.

RESULTS

There were 6 (3.1%) peri or immediate postoperative complications. There were 33 (18%) long term complications needing 26 (14%) revisions. 90% of the surgeons audience attending the events evaluated the educational benefit from good to very good.

DISCUSSION

Over the years, we have standardized the organization of the meeting to ensure maximum safety, while still respecting patient integrity and anonymity. Our complications rates seem within the ranges found in the current literature for each procedure. Our LSE has been an instrument for education, but also for matching patients with complex problems with experienced surgeons, to the benefit of the patient. Our experience has shown that LSE may induce potential dangers and complications can arise. However, these events should follow rigorous rules and not just recommendations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

Surgeon and surgical conference attendee views on live surgery events

Based on the principles of biomedical ethics, the authors conducted a survey focusing on the ethical aspects of, didactic benefits of and possible alternatives to live surgery events. This work provides an investigation of the ethics of live surgery events in an interdisciplinary and multicentre setting. Critical ethical concerns regarding the justification of such events are highlighted through evaluation of attendees and surgeons.

["Halle surgery week": how a teaching format awakens medical students' interest in surgery]

Hintergrund

Eine studierendenorientierte Ausbildung ist in der praktischen Chirurgie schwierig und nur unzureichend umsetzbar. Neue Lehrkonzepte sind notwendig, um Studierenden die Chirurgie näherzubringen und sie für das Fach zu begeistern.

Methodik

In einer zweiwöchigen fakultativen Veranstaltung konnten Studierende der Humanmedizin insgesamt acht chirurgische Eingriffe aus verschiedenen Fachrichtungen live im Hörsaal mitverfolgen. Zeitgleich erfolgte im Hörsaal eine Moderation durch eine/n erfahrene/n Chirurgen/in. Anhand von Fragebögen (prä/post) wurde begleitend zu jeder Operation untersucht, inwieweit sich die Lehrveranstaltung eignet, das Verständnis und das Interesse für die chirurgische Tätigkeit zu verbessern.

Ergebnisse

Insgesamt lagen 709 vollständige Tagesevaluationen (prä und post) von 381 Studierenden vor. Der selbstberichtete Lerneffekt wurde von den Studierenden als gut bis sehr gut bewertet. In vielen dargestellten Fachgebieten zeigten sich durch die Teilnahme an den Liveoperationen signifikant positive Einstellungsänderungen in Bezug auf das jeweils operierende Fach allgemein, in Bezug auf eine geplante Famulatur und für die Wahl als späteres Fachgebiet.

Schlussfolgerung

Die hohen Teilnehmendenzahlen und die Evaluationsergebnisse lassen auf eine hohe Akzeptanz der Lehrveranstaltung schließen. Das Lehrformat ist geeignet, das Verständnis für chirurgische Abläufe zu verbessern sowie die Einstellung von Medizinstudierenden gegenüber chirurgischen Fachgebieten positiv zu beeinflussen.

Outcomes of EAU-endorsed Live Surgical Events over a 5-year Period (2015-2020) and Updated Guidelines from the EAU Live Surgery Committee

CONTEXT

Live surgery events (LSEs) have been used in all surgical fields for education and training and to demonstrate new techniques. The European Association of Urology (EAU) live surgery guidelines were established in 2014.

OBJECTIVE

To review the compliance of outcomes for procedures performed at EAU-affiliated LSEs with the 2014 guidelines and to establish updated guidelines for LSEs and semi-LSEs.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Patients from EAU-affiliated LSEs were included for all surgical procedures carried out between January 2015 and January 2020. All these events were pre-evaluated by the EAU Live Surgery Committee and met the criteria for an EAU LSE, with outcomes recorded and submitted to the registry. Data were collected for the type of procedure and for intraoperative and short- and long-term complications.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 246 procedures were performed across 18 LSEs, with an annual volume ranging from 19 to 74 procedures. These included 109 (44.3%) robot-assisted procedures, 21 (8.5%) laparoscopic procedures, 10 (4%) transurethral bladder procedures, 11 (4.4%) prostate enucleation procedures, 72 (29.2%) endourological procedures, and 23 (9.3%) andrology or reconstruction procedures. A total of 77 different surgical techniques and variations for 55 different types of surgery were performed as LSEs over the past 5 yr. There were 44 (17.8%) short-term complications and 11.3% (nine/79) long-term complications observed, with Clavien grade III/IV complications seen in 5.2% and 7.5% of cases over short- and long-term follow-up, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-yr outcomes for EAU LSEs show that they are safe and follow previous guidelines set by the panel. It seems likely that the fine balance between patient safety and educational value might be best achieved if LSEs are performed by local surgeons in their parent hospital with patients and staff they know, and that technological advances will make live streaming a seamless process. The current EAU Live Surgery Committee has updated the guidelines on LSEs and provided new guidelines for semi-live events.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed 5-year outcomes for live surgery events endorsed by the European Association of Urology. We found that the operations carried out at these events were safe and followed the guidelines previously set. We have updated the guidelines and provided new guidelines for semi-live events.

Live surgery: Safety study after 17 editions of retroperitoneoscopic surgery

INTRODUCTION

Live surgery has become an excellent tool for medical training. Despite this, there is controversy about the safety of the patients involved.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the results of live surgeries performed in 17 consecutive retroperitoneoscopy courses organized in our center. Procedures performed were partial nephrectomy (PN), radical nephrectomy (RN) and nephroureterectomy (NU).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Review from January 2010 to October 2017 of all live surgeries carried out by an expert surgical team in the retroperitoneoscopy courses, compared with a control group of surgeries performed in standard conditions. A matching (1:1 for each RN and 1:2 for each PN and NU) according to age, body mass index and comorbidities was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one live surgeries were analyzed (eight PN, seven RN and six NU) with a global median follow-up of 38 months. No significant differences were observed between both groups in terms of perioperative variables (operative time, operative bleeding and intraoperative complications) or of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. Likewise, there were no differences between recurrence rates (PN: 0% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.47, NU: 33.3% vs. 66.7%, p = 0.180, RN: 0% vs. 28.6%, p = 0,127).

CONCLUSIONS

Live surgery in the hands of expert surgeons in a suitable environment and with well-selected patients does not increase the risk of complications and allows maintaining the same oncological outcomes.

Evaluation of Live Surgery Meetings: Our Experience with the "Live Makeover Aesthetic Surgery Symposium"

Live Surgery Meetings have been established as a vey effective means to demonstrate certain surgical techniques and intraoperative decision-making. However, many authors still question the ethics of this approach. We present our experience as organizers of the Live Makeover Aesthetic Surgery Symposium, an annual international live surgery meeting taking place in Athens, Greece.

Learning benefits of live surgery and semi-live surgery in urology-informing the debate with results from the International Meeting of Reconstructive Urology (IMORU) VIII

Purpose

To analyze the perceived learning opportunities of participants of the International Meeting on Reconstructive Urology (IMORU) VIII for both live surgery demonstrations (LSD) and semi-live surgery demonstrations (SLSD). Safety and educational efficacy of LSD and SLSD at live surgery events (LSE) have been debated extensively, however, objective data comparing learning benefits are missing.

Methods

We conducted a detailed survey, which employed the Kirkpatrick model, a well-established assessment method of training models, to investigate participants preferences as well as the learning benefit of LSE. Furthermore, we employed an audience response system and the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), a well-established assessment method of surgery skills, to let our participants rate the perceived learning opportunity of LSD and SLSD.

Results

Of 229 participants at the IMORU VIII, 39.7% returned our questionnaires. 90% stated that they prefer LSD. On all levels of Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model, the IMORU received high ratings, suggesting a high learning benefit. For the assessment of OSATS, a total of 23 surgical cases were evaluable. For all six utilized items, LSD scored significantly better ratings than SLSD.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that there is still a rationale for LSD, as participants attributed a statistically significant higher learning benefit to LSD over SLDS. Evaluation of the survey showed that for LSE such as the IMORU VIII, a high learning benefit can be expected. Considering that most of our participants are active surgeons with high caseloads, their opinion on the educational value of LSE is of high relevance.

Didactic Benefits of Surgery on Body Donors during Live Surgery Events in Minimally Invasive Surgery

Background: Live surgery events serve as a valuable tool for surgical education, but also raise ethical concerns about patient safety and professional performance. In the present study, we evaluate the technical feasibility and didactic benefits of live surgery on body donors compared to real patients. Methods: A live surgery session performed on a body donor’s cadaver embalmed in ethanol–glycerol–lysoformin was integrated into the live surgery program presented at a major gynecological convention of minimally invasive surgery. Surgical procedures carried out in real patients were paralleled in the body donor, including the dissection and illustration of surgically relevant anatomical landmarks. A standardized questionnaire was filled by the participants (n = 208) to evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, and benefits of this novel concept. Results: The live surgery event was appreciated as a useful educational tool. With regard to the use of body donors, authenticity was rated high (85.5%), and the overall value of body donors for surgical education and training was rated very high (95.0%). The didactic benefit of simultaneous operations performed on body donors and real patients was considered particularly useful (95.5%), whereas complete replacement of real patients by body donors was not favored (14.5%). Conclusions: The study demonstrated both the technical feasibility and didactic benefits of performing minimally invasive surgery in body donors as part of live surgery events. This novel concept has the potential to enhance anatomical knowledge, providing insights into complex surgical procedures, and may serve to overcome yet unresolved ethical concerns related to live surgery events.

Surgical apprenticeship in the era of simulation

The new tools for transmission of knowledge and skills (simulation, surgery broadcast, virtual reality, augmented reality…) offer novel opportunities for training through mentoring. The peer network is widened; the dissemination of knowledge is accelerated. The new ways of teaching bring benefit to each aspect of the surgical profession: clinical reasoning, performance of technical procedures, stress management, communication and management of severe or exceptional adverse events. Previously, confined to surgical teams, mentoring has been extended to simulation centers, which are becoming virtual hospitals, and it has been prolonged on the Internet via social networks. In the sphere of digital mentoring, objectives are henceforth more structured, skills assessment is more standardized, phases of apprenticeship are redefined, and individualized training contracts are formalized.

Live-case demonstrations in pediatric urology: Ethics, patient safety, and clinical outcomes from an 8-year institutional experience

Purpose

Live case demonstrations have become a common occurrence at surgical meetings around the world. These demonstrations are meant to serve as an educational medium for teaching techniques, promote discussion, improve interventions and outcomes. Despite the valuable educational benefits, many authors still question the ethics of this approach. We present our 8-year experience in live surgery, discuss the ethical issues, and provide recommendations.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed records of patients who underwent live robotic surgery during broadcasting events. Procedures performed were robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P), ureteral reimplantation (RALUR), and hemi-nephrectomy (RAL-HN). Peri- and post-operative outcomes were compared to our previously published case series.

Results

From October 2011 to May 2019, the senior author (MSG) performed all live surgery demonstrations on 22 patients: 9 RAL-P, 9 RALUR, and 4 RAL-HN. Live RAL-Ps had a 100% success rate and lower 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade (CDG) III complications when compared to our previous case series (11.1% vs. 21.2%). RALURs performed during live demonstrations had a higher success rate than our previously published cohort (100% vs. 82%). RAL-HN operative time and length of stay were comparable to our non-live control group.

Conclusions

Live surgery is a valuable didactic tool, but even experienced surgeons may be adversely affected by inappropriate case selection, technical difficulty, and anxiety associated with particular settings, such as operating at different institutions or working with unfamiliar surgical teams. We suggest consultation of an ethics review board and formulation of standard guidelines for patient selection, surgical equipment, and operative team.

Teaching robotic rectal cancer surgery at your workplace: does the presence of visiting surgeons in the operating room have a detrimental effect on outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Surgery demonstration (SD) is considered to be a mainstay of surgical education, but controversy exists concerning the patient's safety. Indeed, the presence of visiting surgeons is a source of distraction and may have an impact on surgeon's performance. This study's objective was to evaluate possible differences in outcomes between robotic sphincter-saving rectal cancer surgery (RRCS) performed during routine surgical practice versus in the presence of visiting surgeons in the operating room (OR) with direct access to the surgeon.

METHODS

Retrospective case-matched studies were conducted from a prospectively collected database. 114 patients (38 with the presence of visiting surgeons) who underwent RRCS between January 2013 and September 2018 were included. Patients were matched in a 1:2 basis after propensity score analysis using five criteria: gender, body mass index, preoperative chemoradiation, type of mesorectum excision, and synchronous liver metastasis.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the two groups with regard to mean operating time, estimated blood loss, conversion, and hospital stay. Also, overall (44% vs. 40%; P = 0.6), major morbidity (26% vs. 19%; P = 0.5), and unplanned reoperation (17% vs. 15%; P = 1.0) rates were not statistically different. No difference was noted with regard to the quality of mesorectum excision, or positive rate of circumferential and distal longitudinal resection margins. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes (17 vs. 14.5; P = 0.04) was lower in the SD group and the number of patients with < 12 harvested lymph nodes (31% vs. 16%; P = 0.09) was greater after SD although it did not reach statistical significance. No differences were observed in disease-free or overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of visiting surgeons in the OR seems not to interfere in the quality of rectal resection and does not compromise patient's short-term outcome and survival. However, mild differences in the extent of lymphadenectomy were observed and the surgeons performing SD may be aware of this.

Surgical teaching in urology: patient safety and educational value of 'LIVE' and 'SEMI-LIVE' surgical demonstrations

Purpose

To evaluate the opinion of urologists and their audience regarding patient safety and educational value of live surgical demonstrations (LSD) and semi-live surgical demonstrations (semi-LSD).

Methods

Following the ‘2017 Challenges in Endourology’ meeting, a survey addressing patient safety and the educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was disseminated online to all participants. Survey outcomes of LSD and semi-LSD were compared.

Results

All 279 respondents attended both LSD and semi-LSD. Overall, 53% of said respondents stated that patient safety was always the highest priority for LSD, while 74% noted the same for semi-LSD. The complication risk in LSD was perceived equal by 57% of the respondents when compared to cases of similar difficulty in routine practice, while 38% perceived it as a greater risk. For semi-LSD, the complication risk was perceived equal by 84%, while 5% perceived it to be a greater risk in comparison to general practice. On a scale from 0 (no value) to 10 (highly valuable), the average educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was rated 8.4 and 8.3, respectively. A substantial percentage of the surgeons who perform LSD express concerns that live surgery is not the optimal setting to ensure patient safety.

Conclusions

LSD remains a popular tool for surgical education among urologists and their audience. However, patient safety remains a concern and is perceived less of a concern for semi-LSD. The educational value of LSD and semi-LSD was scored equally high. Therefore, we should consider to advocate the use of semi-LSD more often.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00345-018-2291-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions

Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.