1
|
Gauci C, Zahid A, Ravindran P, Lynch AC, Pillinger S. Preceptorship in robotic colorectal surgery: experience from the Australian private sector. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:213. [PMID: 38758341 PMCID: PMC11101540 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01972-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2024] [Accepted: 05/04/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Abstract
This article describes a post-fellowship preceptorship training program to train sub-specialty colorectal surgeons in gaining proficiency in robotic colorectal surgery using a dual-surgeon model in the Australian private sector. The Australian colorectal surgeon faces challenges in gaining robotic colorectal surgery proficiency with limited exposure and experience in the public setting where the majority of general and colorectal surgery training is currently conducted. This training model uses graded exposure with a range of simulation training, wet lab training, and clinical operative cases to progress through both competency and proficiency in robotic colorectal surgery which is mutually beneficial to surgeons and patients alike. Ongoing audit of practice has shown no adverse impacts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chahaya Gauci
- Australian Robotic Colorectal Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- University of Sydney (Sydney Medical School), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- St George and Sutherland Clinical School, University of New South Wales Medicine, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Assad Zahid
- Australian Robotic Colorectal Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Praveen Ravindran
- Australian Robotic Colorectal Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Andrew Craig Lynch
- Australian Robotic Colorectal Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
| | - Stephen Pillinger
- Australian Robotic Colorectal Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hertz P, Rattenborg S, Haug TR, Houlind K, Konge L, Bjerrum F. Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendicectomy- a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 2024; 26:597-608. [PMID: 38396135 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16905] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2023] [Revised: 11/07/2023] [Accepted: 12/28/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2024]
Abstract
AIM There is currently an increased focus on competency-based training, in which training and assessment play a crucial role. The aim of this systematic review is to create an overview of hands-on training methods and assessment tools for appendicectomy and colon and rectal surgery procedures using either an open, laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach. METHOD A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted the last search on 9 March 2023. All published papers describing hands-on training, evaluation of performance data and development of assessment tools were eligible. The quality of studies and the validity evidence of assessment tools are reported. RESULTS Fifty-one studies were identified. Laparoscopic assessment tools are abundant, but the literature still lacks good-quality assessment tools for open appendicectomy, robotic colectomy and open rectal surgery. Overall, there is a lack of discussion regarding the establishment of pass/fail standards and the consequences of assessment. Virtual reality simulation is used more for appendicectomy than colorectal procedures. Only a few of the studies investigating training were of acceptable quality. There is a need for high-quality studies in open and robotic-assisted colon surgery and all approaches to rectal surgery. CONCLUSION This review provides an overview of current training methods and assessment tools and identifies where more research is needed based on the quality of the studies and the current validity evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Hertz
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Lillebaelt, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
- Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR and Education, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Søren Rattenborg
- Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Lillebaelt Vejle, Colorectal Cancer Center South, University of Southern Denmark DK, Kolding, Denmark
| | - Tora R Haug
- Department of Surgery, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark
- Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Kim Houlind
- Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Hospital Lillebaelt, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark
| | - Lars Konge
- Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR and Education, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Flemming Bjerrum
- Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR and Education, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Gastrounit, Surgical Section, Copenhagen University Hospital - Amager and Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tou S, Au S, Clancy C, Clarke S, Collins D, Dixon F, Dreher E, Fleming C, Gallagher AG, Gomez-Ruiz M, Kleijnen J, Maeda Y, Rollins K, Matzel KE. European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024). Colorectal Dis 2024; 26:776-801. [PMID: 38429251 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16904] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2024] [Accepted: 01/14/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Samson Tou
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Derby, UK
| | | | - Cillian Clancy
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Steven Clarke
- University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Danielle Collins
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, Scotland
| | - Frances Dixon
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Milton Keynes, UK
| | - Elizabeth Dreher
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK
| | - Christina Fleming
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | | | - Marcos Gomez-Ruiz
- Colorectal Surgery Unit, General Surgery Department, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Santander, Spain
- Valdecilla Biomedical Research Institute (IDIVAL), Santander, Spain
| | - Jos Kleijnen
- Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, York, UK
- School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Yasuko Maeda
- Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Katie Rollins
- Gastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK
| | - Klaus E Matzel
- Section of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, FAU, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Larkins K, Quirke N, Ong HI, Mohamed JE, Heriot A, Warrier S, Mohan H. The deconstructed procedural description in robotic colorectal surgery. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:147. [PMID: 38554192 PMCID: PMC10981632 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01907-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/01/2024]
Abstract
Increasing robotic surgical utilisation in colorectal surgery internationally has strengthened the need for standardised training. Deconstructed procedural descriptions identify components of an operation that can be integrated into proficiency-based progression training. This approach allows both access to skill level appropriate training opportunities and objective and comparable assessment. Robotic colorectal surgery has graded difficulty of operative procedures lending itself ideally to component training. Developing deconstructed procedural descriptions may assist in the structure and progression components in robotic colorectal surgical training. There is no currently published guide to procedural descriptions in robotic colorectal surgical or assessment of their training utility. This scoping review was conducted in June 2022 following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines to identify which robotic colorectal surgical procedures have available component-based procedural descriptions. Secondary aims were identifying the method of development of these descriptions and how they have been adapted in a training context. 20 published procedural descriptions were identified covering 8 robotic colorectal surgical procedures with anterior resection the most frequently described procedure. Five publications included descriptions of how the procedural description has been utilised for education and training. From these publications terminology relating to using deconstructed procedural descriptions in robotic colorectal surgical training is proposed. Development of deconstructed robotic colorectal procedural descriptions (DPDs) in an international context may assist in the development of a global curriculum of component operating competencies supported by objective metrics. This will allow for standardisation of robotic colorectal surgical training and supports a proficiency-based training approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kirsten Larkins
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Ned Quirke
- University College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Hwa Ian Ong
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia.
| | - Jade El Mohamed
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Alexander Heriot
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Satish Warrier
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Helen Mohan
- Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- International Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Boal MWE, Anastasiou D, Tesfai F, Ghamrawi W, Mazomenos E, Curtis N, Collins JW, Sridhar A, Kelly J, Stoyanov D, Francis NK. Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review. Br J Surg 2024; 111:znad331. [PMID: 37951600 PMCID: PMC10771126 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Revised: 09/18/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a need to standardize training in robotic surgery, including objective assessment for accreditation. This systematic review aimed to identify objective tools for technical skills assessment, providing evaluation statuses to guide research and inform implementation into training curricula. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Ovid Embase/Medline, PubMed and Web of Science were searched. Inclusion criterion: robotic surgery technical skills tools. Exclusion criteria: non-technical, laparoscopy or open skills only. Manual tools and automated performance metrics (APMs) were analysed using Messick's concept of validity and the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence and Recommendation (LoR). A bespoke tool analysed artificial intelligence (AI) studies. The Modified Downs-Black checklist was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS Two hundred and forty-seven studies were analysed, identifying: 8 global rating scales, 26 procedure-/task-specific tools, 3 main error-based methods, 10 simulators, 28 studies analysing APMs and 53 AI studies. Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills and the da Vinci Skills Simulator were the most evaluated tools at LoR 1 (OCEBM). Three procedure-specific tools, 3 error-based methods and 1 non-simulator APMs reached LoR 2. AI models estimated outcomes (skill or clinical), demonstrating superior accuracy rates in the laboratory with 60 per cent of methods reporting accuracies over 90 per cent, compared to real surgery ranging from 67 to 100 per cent. CONCLUSIONS Manual and automated assessment tools for robotic surgery are not well validated and require further evaluation before use in accreditation processes.PROSPERO: registration ID CRD42022304901.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew W E Boal
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park & St Marks’ Hospital, London, UK
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), London, UK
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL, London, UK
| | - Dimitrios Anastasiou
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), London, UK
- Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, UCL, London, UK
| | - Freweini Tesfai
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park & St Marks’ Hospital, London, UK
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), London, UK
| | - Walaa Ghamrawi
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park & St Marks’ Hospital, London, UK
| | - Evangelos Mazomenos
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), London, UK
- Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, UCL, London, UK
| | - Nathan Curtis
- Department of General Surgey, Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Dorchester, UK
| | - Justin W Collins
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL, London, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Ashwin Sridhar
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL, London, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - John Kelly
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL, London, UK
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Danail Stoyanov
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional Surgical Sciences (WEISS), University College London (UCL), London, UK
- Computer Science, UCL, London, UK
| | - Nader K Francis
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park & St Marks’ Hospital, London, UK
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, UCL, London, UK
- Yeovil District Hospital, Somerset Foundation NHS Trust, Yeovil, Somerset, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Roll S, Dias ERM. Education in Robotic Hernia Surgery-Current Situation. JOURNAL OF ABDOMINAL WALL SURGERY : JAWS 2023; 2:12418. [PMID: 38312412 PMCID: PMC10831677 DOI: 10.3389/jaws.2023.12418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2023] [Accepted: 11/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/06/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Sergio Roll
- Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences of Santa Casa of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
- Center of Abdominal Wall Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Santa Casa of São Paulo Hospital, School of Medical Sciences of Santa Casa of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
- The German Hospital Oswaldo Cruz Hernia Center, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Burke JR, Fleming CA, King M, El-Sayed C, Bolton WS, Munsch C, Harji D, Bach SP, Collins JW. Utilising an accelerated Delphi process to develop consensus on the requirement and components of a pre-procedural core robotic surgery curriculum. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:1443-1455. [PMID: 36757562 PMCID: PMC9909133 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01518-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2022] [Accepted: 12/31/2022] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) continues to grow globally. Despite this, in the UK and Ireland, it is estimated that over 70% of surgical trainees across all specialities have no access to robot-assisted surgical training (RAST). This study aimed to provide educational stakeholders guidance on a pre-procedural core robotic surgery curriculum (PPCRC) from the perspective of the end user; the surgical trainee. The study was conducted in four Phases: P1: a steering group was formed to review current literature and summarise the evidence, P2: Pan-Specialty Trainee Panel Virtual Classroom Discussion, P3: Accelerated Delphi Process and P4: Formulation of Recommendations. Forty-three surgeons in training representing all surgical specialties and training levels contributed to the three round Delphi process. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from previous rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as ≥ 80% agreement. There was 100% response from all three rounds. The resulting formulated guidance showed good internal consistency, with a Cronbach alpha of > 0.8. There was 97.7% agreement that a standardised PPCRC would be advantageous to training and that, independent of speciality, there should be a common approach (95.5% agreement). Consensus was reached in multiple areas: 1. Experience and Exposure, 2. Access and context, 3. Curriculum Components, 4 Target Groups and Delivery, 5. Objective Metrics, Benchmarking and Assessment. Using the Delphi methodology, we achieved multispecialty consensus among trainees to develop and reach content validation for the requirements and components of a PPCRC. This guidance will benefit from further validation following implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua Richard Burke
- The Association of Surgeons in Training, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England, UK
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Leeds Institute Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Christina A. Fleming
- The Association of Surgeons in Training, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England, UK
- The Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Martin King
- The Association of Surgeons in Training, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England, UK
- Craigavon Area Hospital, Craigavon, Northern Ireland
| | - Charlotte El-Sayed
- Technology Enhanced Learning Directorate of Innovation, Digital and Transformation, Health Education England, London, England
- Academic Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Chris Munsch
- Technology Enhanced Learning Directorate of Innovation, Digital and Transformation, Health Education England, London, England
| | - Deena Harji
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Simon P. Bach
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Academic Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Justin W. Collins
- University College London, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Research Department of Targeted Intervention, London, UK
- Wellcome/ESPRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS), UK, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Harji D, Houston F, Burke J, Griffiths B, Tilney H, Miskovic D, Evans C, Khan J, Soomro N, Bach SP. The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:251-263. [PMID: 35657506 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01421-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/30/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is steadily increasing in popularity with an annual growth in the number of colorectal procedures undertaken robotically. Further upscaling of RACS requires structured and standardised robotic training to safeguard high-quality clinical outcomes. The aims of this systematic review were to assess the structure and assessment metrics of currently established RACS training programmes. A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines was performed. Searches were performed of the Ovid Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases between 2000 and 27th November 2021 to identify studies reporting on training curricula in RACS. Core components of training programmes and their relevant outcome assessment metrics were extracted. Thirteen studies were identified, with all training programmes designed for the da Vinci platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Common elements of multimodal programmes included theoretical knowledge (76.9%), case observation (53.8%), simulation (100%) and proctored training (76.9%). Robotic skills acquisition was assessed primarily during the simulation phase (n = 4, 30.1%) and proctoring phase (n = 10, 76.9%). Performance metrics, consisting of time or assessment scores for VR simulation were only mandated in four (30.1%) studies. Objective assessment following proctored training was variably reported and employed a range of assessment metrics, including direct feedback (n = 3, 23.1%) or video feedback (n = 8, 61.5%). Five (38.4%) training programmes used the Global Assessment Score (GAS) forms. There is a broad consensus on the core multimodal components across current RACS training programmes; however, validated objective assessment is limited and needs to be appropriately standardised to ensure reproducible progression criteria and competency-based metrics are produced to robustly assess progression and competence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deena Harji
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England.
| | | | - Joshua Burke
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Leeds Institute Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ben Griffiths
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Henry Tilney
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Frimley, Surrey, England
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - Danilo Miskovic
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Charles Evans
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, UK
| | - Jim Khan
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK
- School of Health and Care Professions, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Naeem Soomro
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Department of Urology, The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - Simon P Bach
- Robotics and Digital Surgery Initiative, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, England
- Academic Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
de’Angelis N, Marchegiani F, Schena CA, Khan J, Agnoletti V, Ansaloni L, Barría Rodríguez AG, Bianchi PP, Biffl W, Bravi F, Ceccarelli G, Ceresoli M, Chiara O, Chirica M, Cobianchi L, Coccolini F, Coimbra R, Cotsoglou C, D’Hondt M, Damaskos D, De Simone B, Di Saverio S, Diana M, Espin‐Basany E, Fichtner‐Feigl S, Fugazzola P, Gavriilidis P, Gronnier C, Kashuk J, Kirkpatrick AW, Ammendola M, Kouwenhoven EA, Laurent A, Leppaniemi A, Lesurtel M, Memeo R, Milone M, Moore E, Pararas N, Peitzmann A, Pessaux P, Picetti E, Pikoulis M, Pisano M, Ris F, Robison T, Sartelli M, Shelat VG, Spinoglio G, Sugrue M, Tan E, Van Eetvelde E, Kluger Y, Weber D, Catena F. Training curriculum in minimally invasive emergency digestive surgery: 2022 WSES position paper. World J Emerg Surg 2023; 18:11. [PMID: 36707879 PMCID: PMC9883976 DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00476-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/09/2023] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, is widely adopted in elective digestive surgery, but selectively used for surgical emergencies. The present position paper summarizes the available evidence concerning the learning curve to achieve proficiency in emergency MIS and provides five expert opinion statements, which may form the basis for developing standardized curricula and training programs in emergency MIS. METHODS This position paper was conducted according to the World Society of Emergency Surgery methodology. A steering committee and an international expert panel were involved in the critical appraisal of the literature and the development of the consensus statements. RESULTS Thirteen studies regarding the learning curve in emergency MIS were selected. All but one study considered laparoscopic appendectomy. Only one study reported on emergency robotic surgery. In most of the studies, proficiency was achieved after an average of 30 procedures (range: 20-107) depending on the initial surgeon's experience. High heterogeneity was noted in the way the learning curve was assessed. The experts claim that further studies investigating learning curve processes in emergency MIS are needed. The emergency surgeon curriculum should include a progressive and adequate training based on simulation, supervised clinical practice (proctoring), and surgical fellowships. The results should be evaluated by adopting a credentialing system to ensure quality standards. Surgical proficiency should be maintained with a minimum caseload and constantly evaluated. Moreover, the training process should involve the entire surgical team to facilitate the surgeon's proficiency. CONCLUSIONS Limited evidence exists concerning the learning process in laparoscopic and robotic emergency surgery. The proposed statements should be seen as a preliminary guide for the surgical community while stressing the need for further research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola de’Angelis
- grid.508487.60000 0004 7885 7602Unit of Colorectal and Digestive Surgery, DIGEST Department, Beaujon University Hospital, AP-HP, University of Paris Cité, Clichy, Paris, France ,grid.410511.00000 0001 2149 7878Faculty of Medicine, University of Paris Est, UPEC, Créteil, France
| | - Francesco Marchegiani
- grid.508487.60000 0004 7885 7602Unit of Colorectal and Digestive Surgery, DIGEST Department, Beaujon University Hospital, AP-HP, University of Paris Cité, Clichy, Paris, France
| | - Carlo Alberto Schena
- grid.508487.60000 0004 7885 7602Unit of Colorectal and Digestive Surgery, DIGEST Department, Beaujon University Hospital, AP-HP, University of Paris Cité, Clichy, Paris, France
| | - Jim Khan
- grid.4701.20000 0001 0728 6636Department of Colorectal Surgery, Queen Alexandra Hospital, University of Portsmouth, Southwick Hill Road, Cosham, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Vanni Agnoletti
- grid.414682.d0000 0004 1758 8744Intensive Care Unit, Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy
| | - Luca Ansaloni
- grid.419425.f0000 0004 1760 3027Department of General Surgery, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy
| | | | - Paolo Pietro Bianchi
- grid.4708.b0000 0004 1757 2822Division of General and Robotic Surgery, Department of Health Sciences, San Paolo Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Walter Biffl
- grid.415402.60000 0004 0449 3295Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla, La Jolla, CA USA
| | - Francesca Bravi
- grid.415207.50000 0004 1760 3756Healthcare Administration, Santa Maria Delle Croci Hospital, Ravenna, Italy
| | - Graziano Ceccarelli
- General Surgery, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, USL Umbria 2, Foligno, Italy
| | - Marco Ceresoli
- grid.7563.70000 0001 2174 1754General and Emergency Surgery, School of Medicine and Surgery, Milano-Bicocca University, Monza, Italy
| | - Osvaldo Chiara
- grid.4708.b0000 0004 1757 2822General Surgery and Trauma Team, ASST Niguarda Milano, University of Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Mircea Chirica
- grid.450307.50000 0001 0944 2786Department of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Michallon Hospital, Grenoble University, Grenoble, France
| | - Lorenzo Cobianchi
- grid.419425.f0000 0004 1760 3027Department of General Surgery, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy ,grid.8982.b0000 0004 1762 5736Department of Clinical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Federico Coccolini
- grid.144189.10000 0004 1756 8209General, Emergency and Trauma Department, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Raul Coimbra
- grid.488519.90000 0004 5946 0028Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Riverside, CA USA
| | | | - Mathieu D’Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Dimitris Damaskos
- grid.418716.d0000 0001 0709 1919Department of Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Belinda De Simone
- Department of General and Metabolic Surgery, Poissy and Saint‐Germain‐en‐Laye Hospitals, Poissy, France
| | - Salomone Di Saverio
- Unit of General Surgery, San Benedetto del Tronto Hospital, av5 Asur Marche, San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy
| | - Michele Diana
- grid.11843.3f0000 0001 2157 9291Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France ,grid.420397.b0000 0000 9635 7370IRCAD, Research Institute Against Digestive Cancer, Strasbourg, France
| | - Eloy Espin‐Basany
- grid.7080.f0000 0001 2296 0625Department of General Surgery, Hospital Valle de Hebron, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Stefan Fichtner‐Feigl
- grid.7708.80000 0000 9428 7911Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Paola Fugazzola
- grid.419425.f0000 0004 1760 3027Department of General Surgery, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy
| | - Paschalis Gavriilidis
- grid.15628.380000 0004 0393 1193Department of HBP Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Clifford Bridge Road, Coventry, CV2 2DX UK
| | - Caroline Gronnier
- grid.42399.350000 0004 0593 7118Eso-Gastric Surgery Unit, Department of Digestive Surgery, Magellan Center, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Jeffry Kashuk
- grid.12136.370000 0004 1937 0546Department of Surgery, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Andrew W. Kirkpatrick
- grid.414959.40000 0004 0469 2139Department of General, Acute Care, Abdominal Wall Reconstruction, and Trauma Surgery, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB Canada
| | - Michele Ammendola
- grid.411489.10000 0001 2168 2547Digestive Surgery Unit, Health of Science Department, “Magna Graecia” University Medical School, “Mater Domini” Hospital, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Ewout A. Kouwenhoven
- grid.417370.60000 0004 0502 0983Department of Surgery, Hospital Group Twente ZGT, Almelo, Netherlands
| | - Alexis Laurent
- grid.410511.00000 0001 2149 7878Faculty of Medicine, University of Paris Est, UPEC, Créteil, France ,grid.412116.10000 0004 1799 3934Unit of HPB and Service of General Surgery, Henri Mondor University Hospital, Creteil, France
| | - Ari Leppaniemi
- grid.7737.40000 0004 0410 2071Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Mickaël Lesurtel
- grid.508487.60000 0004 7885 7602Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, AP-HP Beaujon Hospital, University of Paris Cité, Clichy, France
| | - Riccardo Memeo
- grid.415844.80000 0004 1759 7181Unit of Hepato‐Pancreato‐Biliary Surgery, General Regional Hospital “F. Miulli”, Acquaviva delle Fonti, Bari, Italy
| | - Marco Milone
- grid.4691.a0000 0001 0790 385XDepartment of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II” University of Naples, Naples, Italy
| | - Ernest Moore
- grid.241116.10000000107903411Ernest E Moore Shock Trauma Center at Denver Health, University of Colorado, Denver, CO USA
| | - Nikolaos Pararas
- grid.5216.00000 0001 2155 08003Rd Department of Surgery, Attikon General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
| | - Andrew Peitzmann
- grid.21925.3d0000 0004 1936 9000University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Patrick Pessaux
- grid.11843.3f0000 0001 2157 9291Visceral and Digestive Surgery, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France ,grid.480511.9Institute for Image‐Guided Surgery, IHU Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France ,Institute of Viral and Liver Disease, INSERM U1110, Strasbourg, France
| | - Edoardo Picetti
- grid.411482.aDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Manos Pikoulis
- grid.5216.00000 0001 2155 08003Rd Department of Surgery, Attikon General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), Athens, Greece
| | - Michele Pisano
- 1St General Surgery Unit, Department of Emergency, ASST Papa Giovanni Hospital Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Frederic Ris
- grid.150338.c0000 0001 0721 9812Division of Digestive Surgery, University Hospitals of Geneva and Medical School, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Tyler Robison
- grid.5288.70000 0000 9758 5690Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellow, Division of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR USA
| | | | - Vishal G. Shelat
- grid.240988.f0000 0001 0298 8161Department of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Giuseppe Spinoglio
- grid.420397.b0000 0000 9635 7370IRCAD Faculty Member Robotic and Colorectal Surgery‐ IRCAD, Strasbourg, France
| | - Michael Sugrue
- grid.415900.90000 0004 0617 6488Department of Surgery, Letterkenny University Hospital, Donegal, Ireland
| | - Edward Tan
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Ellen Van Eetvelde
- grid.411326.30000 0004 0626 3362Department of Digestive Surgery, UZ, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Yoram Kluger
- Department of General Surgery, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Dieter Weber
- grid.416195.e0000 0004 0453 3875Department of Trauma Surgery, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Fausto Catena
- grid.414682.d0000 0004 1758 8744Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Bufalini Hospital‐Level 1 Trauma Center, Cesena, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Rahimi AO, Ho K, Chang M, Gasper D, Ashouri Y, Dearmon-Moore D, Hsu CH, Ghaderi I. A systematic review of robotic surgery curricula using a contemporary educational framework. Surg Endosc 2022; 37:2833-2841. [PMID: 36481821 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09788-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2022] [Accepted: 11/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There has been a rising trend in robotic surgery. Thus, there is demand for a robotic surgery curriculum (RSC) for training surgical trainees and practicing surgeons. There are limited data available about current curricular designs and the extent to which they have incorporated educational frameworks. Our aim was to study the existing robotic surgery curricula using Kern's 6-step approach in curriculum development. METHODS A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus (we searched studies from 2001 to 2021). PRISMA Guidelines was used to guide the search. Curriculum designed for general surgery and its subspecialties were included. Urology and gynecology were excluded. The articles were reviewed by five reviewers. RESULTS Our review yielded 71 articles, including 39 curricula at 9 different settings. Using Kern's framework, we demonstrated that the majority of robotic surgery curricula contained all the elements of Kern's curricular design. However, there were significant deficiencies in important aspects of these curricula i.e., implementation, the quality of assessment tools for measurement of performance and evaluation of the educational value of these interventions. Most institutions used commercial virtual reality simulators (VRS) as the main component of their RSC and 23% of curricula only used VRS. CONCLUSIONS Although majority of these studies contained all the elements of Kern's framework, there are critical deficiencies in the components of existing curricula. Future curricula should be designed using established educational frameworks to improve the quality of robotic surgery training.
Collapse
|
11
|
Vining CC, Skowron KB, Hogg ME. Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes. Updates Surg 2021; 73:799-814. [PMID: 33484423 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-00973-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2020] [Accepted: 01/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
The use of the robotic platform for gastrointestinal surgery was introduced nearly 20 years ago. However, significant growth and advancement has occurred primarily in the last decade. This is due to several advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery allowing for more complex dissections and reconstructions. Several randomized controlled trials and retrospective reviews have demonstrated equivalent oncologic outcomes compared to open surgery with improved short-term outcomes. Unfortunately, there are currently no universally accepted or implemented training programs for robotic surgery and robotic surgery experience varies greatly. Additionally, several limitations to the robotic platform exist resulting in a distinct learning curve associated with various procedures. Therefore, implementation of robotic surgery requires a multidisciplinary team approach with commitment and investment from clinical faculty, operating room staff and hospital administrators. Additionally, there is a need for wider distribution of educational modules to train more surgeons and reduce the associated learning curve. This article will focus on the implementation of the robotic platform for surgery of the pancreas, stomach, liver, colon and rectum with an emphasis on the associated learning curve, educational platforms to develop proficiency and perioperative outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles C Vining
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Kinga B Skowron
- Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Walgreens Building, Floor 2, 2650 Ridge Road, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Fong Y, Buell JF, Collins J, Martinie J, Bruns C, Tsung A, Clavien PA, Nachmany I, Edwin B, Pratschke J, Solomonov E, Koenigsrainer A, Giulianotti PC. Applying the Delphi process for development of a hepatopancreaticobiliary robotic surgery training curriculum. Surg Endosc 2020; 34:4233-4244. [PMID: 32767146 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07836-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2020] [Accepted: 07/21/2020] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) procedures are performed worldwide and establishing processes for safe adoption of this technology is essential for patient benefit. We report results of the Delphi process to define and optimize robotic training procedures for HPB surgeons. METHODS In 2019, a robotic HPB surgery panel with an interest in surgical training from the Americas and Europe was created and met. An e-consensus-finding exercise using the Delphi process was applied and consensus was defined as 80% agreement on each question. Iterations of anonymous voting continued over three rounds. RESULTS Members agreed on several points: there was need for a standardized robotic training curriculum for HPB surgery that considers experience of surgeons and based on a robotic hepatectomy includes a common approach for "basic robotic skills" training (e-learning module, including hardware description, patient selection, port placement, docking, troubleshooting, fundamentals of robotic surgery, team training and efficiency, and emergencies) and an "advanced technical skills curriculum" (e-learning, including patient selection information, cognitive skills, and recommended operative equipment lists). A modular approach to index procedures should be used with video demonstrations, port placement for index procedure, troubleshooting, and emergency scenario management information. Inexperienced surgeons should undergo training in basic robotic skills and console proficiency, transitioning to full procedure training of e-learning (video demonstration, simulation training, case observation, and final evaluation). Experienced surgeons should undergo basic training when using a new system (e-learning, dry lab, and operating room (OR) team training, virtual reality modules, and wet lab; case observations were unnecessary for basic training) and should complete the advanced index procedural robotic curriculum with assessment by wet lab, case observation, and OR team training. CONCLUSIONS Optimization and standardization of training and education of HPB surgeons in robotic procedures was agreed upon. Results are being incorporated into future curriculum for education in robotic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuman Fong
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91011, USA.
| | - Joseph F Buell
- Department of Surgery, Mission Healthcare, HCA Healthcare, North Carolina Division, MAHEC University of North Carolina, Asheville, NC, USA
| | - Justin Collins
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - John Martinie
- Department of General Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Christiane Bruns
- Department of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Allan Tsung
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Pierre-Alain Clavien
- Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ido Nachmany
- Department of "Surgery B". Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv & The Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- The Intervention Centre and Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway
| | - Johann Pratschke
- Department of Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Evgeny Solomonov
- Department of General and Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Ziv Medical Centre, Zefat (Safed), Israel
| | - Alfred Koenigsrainer
- Department of General, Visceral, Cancer and Surgery, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
NACUL MIGUELPRESTES, MELANI ARMANDOGERALDOFRANCHINI, ZILBERSTEIN BRUNO, BENEVENUTO DYEGOSÁ, CAVAZZOLA LEANDROTOTTI, ARAUJO RAPHAELL, SALLUM RUBENSANTONIOAISSAR, AGUIAR-JR SAMUEL, TOMASICH FLÁVIO. Educational note: teaching and training in robotic surgery. An opinion of the Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery Committee of the Brazilian College of Surgeons. Rev Col Bras Cir 2020; 47:e20202681. [DOI: 10.1590/0100-6991e-20202681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
ABSTRACT With the expansion of robotic surgical procedures, the acquisition of specific knowledge and skills for surgeons to reach proficiency seems essential before performing surgical procedures on humans. In this sense, the authors present a proposal to establish a certification based on objective and validated criteria for carrying out robotic procedures. A study was carried out by the Committee on Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery of the Brazilian College of Surgeons based on a reviewing strategy of the scientific literature. The study serves as a reference for the creation of a standard for the qualification and certification in robotic surgery according to a statement of the Brazilian Medical Association (AMB) announced on December 17, 2019. The standard proposes a minimum curriculum, integrating training and performance evaluation. The initial (pre-clinical) stage aims at knowledge and adaptation to a specific robotic platform and the development of psychomotor skills based on surgical simulation. Afterwards, the surgeon must accompany in person at least five surgeries in the specialty, participate as a bedside assistant in at least 10 cases and perform 10 surgeries under the supervision of a preceptor surgeon. The surgeon who completes all the steps will be considered qualified in robotic surgery in his specialty. The final certification must be issued by the specialty societies affiliated to AMB. The authors conclude that the creation of a norm for habilitation in robotic surgery should encourage Brazilian hospitals to apply objective qualification criteria for this type of procedure to qualify assistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - BRUNO ZILBERSTEIN
- Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Brasil; Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil; Faculdade de Medicina SL Mandic, Brasil
| | | | - LEANDRO TOTTI CAVAZZOLA
- Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Brasil; Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brasil; Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
| | - RAPHAEL L.C. ARAUJO
- Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Brasil; Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil; Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Brazil
| | | | - SAMUEL AGUIAR-JR
- Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Brasil; Hospital AC Camargo, Brazil
| | - FLÁVIO TOMASICH
- Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, Brasil; Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Veronesi G, Dorn P, Dunning J, Cardillo G, Schmid RA, Collins J, Baste JM, Limmer S, Shahin GMM, Egberts JH, Pardolesi A, Meacci E, Stamenkovic S, Casali G, Rueckert JC, Taurchini M, Santelmo N, Melfi F, Toker A. Outcomes from the Delphi process of the Thoracic Robotic Curriculum Development Committee. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2019; 53:1173-1179. [PMID: 29377988 DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezx466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2017] [Accepted: 12/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES As the adoption of robotic procedures becomes more widespread, additional risk related to the learning curve can be expected. This article reports the results of a Delphi process to define procedures to optimize robotic training of thoracic surgeons and to promote safe performance of established robotic interventions as, for example, lung cancer and thymoma surgery. METHODS In June 2016, a working panel was spontaneously created by members of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) and European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) with a specialist interest in robotic thoracic surgery and/or surgical training. An e-consensus-finding exercise using the Delphi methodology was applied requiring 80% agreement to reach consensus on each question. Repeated iterations of anonymous voting continued over 3 rounds. RESULTS Agreement was reached on many points: a standardized robotic training curriculum for robotic thoracic surgery should be divided into clearly defined sections as a staged learning pathway; the basic robotic curriculum should include a baseline evaluation, an e-learning module, a simulation-based training (including virtual reality simulation, Dry lab and Wet lab) and a robotic theatre (bedside) observation. Advanced robotic training should include e-learning on index procedures (right upper lobe) with video demonstration, access to video library of robotic procedures, simulation training, modular console training to index procedure, transition to full-procedure training with a proctor and final evaluation of the submitted video to certified independent examiners. CONCLUSIONS Agreement was reached on a large number of questions to optimize and standardize training and education of thoracic surgeons in robotic activity. The production of the content of the learning material is ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Veronesi
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milan, Italy
| | - Patrick Dorn
- Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Inselspital, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Joel Dunning
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Giuseppe Cardillo
- Unit of Thoracic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Camillo Forlanini, Lazzaro Spallanzani Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Ralph A Schmid
- Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Inselspital, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Justin Collins
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Stefan Limmer
- Unit of Thoracic Surgery, Medical Campus Lake Constance, Weingarten, Germany
| | - Ghada M M Shahin
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Isala Heart Center, Zwolle, Netherlands
| | - Jan-Hendrik Egberts
- Department for General-, Visceral-, Thoracic, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital of Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | | | - Elisa Meacci
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
| | - Sasha Stamenkovic
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Gianluca Casali
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Jens C Rueckert
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Competence Centre of Thoracic Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Mauro Taurchini
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo (FG), Italy
| | - Nicola Santelmo
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Les Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
| | - Franca Melfi
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Alper Toker
- Department of General Thoracic Surgery, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Formisano G, Esposito S, Coratti F, Giuliani G, Salaj A, Bianchi PP. Structured training program in colorectal surgery: the robotic surgeon as a new paradigm. MINERVA CHIR 2018; 74:170-175. [PMID: 30484601 DOI: 10.23736/s0026-4733.18.07951-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND One major issue in general surgery is how to provide novice surgeons with a structured training program (STP). The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of a STP in robotic colorectal surgery for young surgeons without prior experience in both open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery, who were autonomous in basic minimally-invasive surgical procedures. Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis has been chosen as a model. METHODS Between May 2015 and December 2017 two junior attending surgeons were trained through a STP. Right colectomy was divided into three main learning modules (colonic mobilization, vascular control, intracorporeal anastomosis) and each one was carried out by the trainees for at least two times under direct supervision of the senior surgeon. After the initial robotic cases completely performed under formal proctoring, they were privileged to perform robotic right colectomy independently without a mentor (20 procedures). Operative time, conversion rate, intra- and postoperative complications, length of stay and pathological outcomes were the variables analyzed to assess the effectiveness of the STP. RESULTS The mean operative time was 200 minutes and no conversion was required. Neither intraoperative nor major postoperative complications were recorded and the mean length of hospital stay was 6 days. Mean nodal yield was 21. CONCLUSIONS A STP in robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and effective. Right colectomy represents a good model as first step of the program in order to develop multiple technical skills. Previous experience in open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery may not be necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giampaolo Formisano
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy -
| | - Sofia Esposito
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Francesco Coratti
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Giuliani
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Adelona Salaj
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Paolo P Bianchi
- Department of General and Minimally-Invasive Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Disbrow DE, Pannell SM, Shanker BA, Albright J, Wu J, Bastawrous A, Soliman M, Ferraro J, Cleary RK. The Effect of Formal Robotic Residency Training on the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Surgery by Young Colorectal Surgeons. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL EDUCATION 2018; 75:767-778. [PMID: 29054345 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2017] [Revised: 08/18/2017] [Accepted: 09/11/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The minimally invasive approach to colorectal surgery is still underused. Only 50% to 60% of colectomies and 10% to 20% of rectal resections for cancer are performed laparoscopically. The increasing adoption of the robotic platform for colorectal surgery warrants re-evaluation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) training techniques. Although considering lessons learned from past laparoscopic training, a standardized national robotic training program for colon and rectal surgery residents was developed and implemented in 2011. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of this program on the usage of MIS in practice following residency training. DESIGN An internet-based 18 question survey was sent to all colon and rectal surgeons who graduated from ACGME-approved colon and rectal surgery residencies from 2013 to 2016. The survey questions were designed to determine MIS practice patterns for young colon and rectal surgeons after residency training for those who participated in the standardized national robotics training course when compared to those who did not participate. Grouped bar charts with error bars are presented along with summary statistics to offer a descriptive overview of training experiences by cohort. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS This study is a survey of colon and rectal surgeons who completed colon and rectal surgery residencies to include all 52 programs across the United States. RESULTS The overall survey response rate was 37.2% (109 of 293). Most (79.8%) of the colon and rectal surgery resident respondents participated in the formal robotic training course. The average respondent reported that 84% of colectomy cases and 74.8% of rectal resections done after residency training by all respondents were by the MIS approach. The laparoscopic approach was most prevalent for colectomies for both course participants (laparoscopic 55.1%, hand assisted lap 14.5%, and robotic 15.7%) and nonparticipants (laparoscopic 53.8%, hand assisted lap 12.3%, and robotic 15.9%). For rectal resections, the robotic approach was the preferred option for course participants (laparoscopic 24.5%, hand assist lap 14.0%, and robotic 39.2%) whereas laparoscopic and open approaches were used more often by nonparticipants (laparoscopic 36.8%, hand assist lap 8.0%, robotic 26.8%, and open 28.4%). Barriers to robotic implementation included lack of robotic mentors, inadequate robotic assistance, and the preference for the laparoscopic approach. CONCLUSION The usage of MIS by young recently fellowship-trained colorectal surgeons is higher than previously reported. The proportion of rectal cases done robotically is higher compared to colon cases and with an apparent decrease in open rather than laparoscopic surgery, suggesting selective usage of robotic surgery for more challenging cases in the pelvis. Methods to more effectively increase the usage of minimally invasive approaches in colorectal surgery warrant further evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David E Disbrow
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Stephanie M Pannell
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Beth-Ann Shanker
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Jeremy Albright
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Juan Wu
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Amir Bastawrous
- Swedish Colon and Rectal Clinic, Swedish Cancer Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Mark Soliman
- Colon and Rectal Clinic of Orlando, Orlando, Florida
| | - Jane Ferraro
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Robert K Cleary
- Colon and Rectal Surgery, St Joseph Mercy Hospital Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Sian TS, Tierney GM, Park H, Lund JN, Speake WJ, Hurst NG, Al Chalabi H, Smith KJ, Tou S. Robotic colorectal surgery: previous laparoscopic colorectal experience is not essential. J Robot Surg 2017; 12:271-275. [PMID: 28721636 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-017-0728-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2017] [Accepted: 07/04/2017] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
A background in minimally invasive colorectal surgery (MICS) has been thought to be essential prior to robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS). Our aim was to determine whether MICS is essential prior to starting RACS training based on results from our initial experience with RACS. Two surgeons from our centre received robotic training through the European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery (EARCS). One surgeon had no prior formal MICS training. We reviewed the first 30 consecutive robotic colorectal procedures from a prospectively maintained database between November 2014 and January 2016 at our institution. Fourteen patients were male. Median age was 64.5 years (range 36-82) and BMI was 27.5 (range 20-32.5). Twelve procedures (40%) were performed by the non-MICS-trained surgeon: ten high anterior resections (one conversion), one low anterior resection and one abdomino-perineal resection of rectum (APER). The MICS-trained surgeon performed nine high and four low anterior resections, one APER and in addition three right hemicolectomies and one abdominal suture rectopexy. There were no intra-operative complications and two patients required re-operation. Median post-operative stay was five days (range 1-26). There were two 30-day re-admissions. All oncological resections had clear margins and median node harvest was 18 (range 9-39). Our case series demonstrates that a background in MICS is not essential prior to starting RACS training. Not having prior MICS training should not discourage surgeons from considering applying for a robotic training programme. Safe and successful robotic colorectal services can be established after completing a formal structured robotic training programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanvir Singh Sian
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK.
| | - G M Tierney
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - H Park
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - J N Lund
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK.,Division of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, School of Medicine, Royal Derby Hospital, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3DT, UK
| | - W J Speake
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - N G Hurst
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - H Al Chalabi
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - K J Smith
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - S Tou
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| |
Collapse
|