Preliminary Experience and Learning Curve for Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Retroperitoneal Pyeloplasty

Comparison Study of Learning Curve Using Cumulative Sum Analysis Between Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: Is Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate a Difficult Procedure for Beginner Urologists?

Objectives: Although there is no comparison study about the learning curves for holmium laser enucleation and other surgical modalities to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), beginner urologists are hesitant to perform holmium laser enucleation because of its steep learning curve. Therefore, we investigated the degree of surgical difficulty of holmium laser enucleation by comparing its learning curve with that of transurethral resection. Patients and Methods: Two beginner urologists performed surgery for BPH: H.J.Y. performed holmium laser enucleation and K.H.K. performed transurethral resection. Of 141 patients, 72 were enrolled in the holmium laser enucleation group and 69 in the transurethral prostate resection group. After retrospectively reviewing medical records, we performed a cumulative sum analysis of resection speed (RS) and resected ratio (RR) to compare the learning curves of holmium laser enucleation and transurethral resection. Results: Both surgeons achieved RS competency with a speed <0.13 g/min. The surgeon who performed holmium laser enucleation achieved RR competency with a ratio <0.40, whereas the surgeon who performed transurethral resection achieved competency with a ratio <0.35. To achieve RS competency of 0.13 g/mL, the holmium laser enucleation and transurethral resection groups required 12 and 23 cases, respectively. To achieve RR competency of 0.35, the holmium laser enucleation and transurethral resection groups required 12 and 5 cases, respectively. Conclusions: Holmium laser enucleation is not a difficult procedure compared with transurethral resection in beginner urologists. Therefore, it is unnecessary to avoid holmium laser enucleation because the concerns that it may be difficult are unfounded.

Learning robotic pyeloplasty without simulators: an assessment of the learning curve in the early robotic era

OBJECTIVE

To analyze our experience and learning curve for robotic pyeloplasty during this robotic procedure.

METHODS

Ninety-nine patients underwent 100 consecutive procedures. Cases were divided into 4 groups of 25 consecutive procedures to analyze the learning curve.

RESULTS

The median anastomosis times were 50.0, 36.8, 34.2 and 29.0 minutes (p=0.137) in the sequential groups, respectively. The median operative times were 144.6, 119.2, 114.5 and 94.6 minutes, with a significant difference between groups 1 and 2 (p=0.015), 1 and 3 (p=0.002), 1 and 4 (p<0.001) and 2 and 4 (p=0.022). The mean hospital stay was 7.08, 4.76, 4.88 and 4.20 days, with a difference between groups 1 and 2 (p<0.001), 1 and 3 (p<0.001) and 1 and 4 (p<0.001). Clinical and radiological improvements were observed in 98.9% of patients. One patient presented with recurrent obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a high success rate with low complication rates. A significant decrease in hospital stay and surgical time was evident after 25 cases.

Learning curve for endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric submucosal tumors: is it more difficult than it may seem?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), as a minimally invasive technique, is gaining wide acceptance for treating epithelial neoplasms. More recently, some pioneers have developed ESD for the treatment of submucosal tumors (SMTs), but characterization of the learning curve is lacking. In this study we aimed to evaluate the learning curve for ESD of gastric SMTs.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

From September 2008 to April 2011, ESD was performed in 50 consecutive patients with gastric SMTs by a single experienced endoscopist at our high-volume institution. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was performed to analyze the shifts in operative time (OT) and consequently to investigate the learning curve.

RESULTS

Analysis of the OT using the CUSUM method identified two distinct phases: Phase 1 (the initial 32 cases) and Phase 2 (the remaining 18 cases). Phase 1 represented the initial learning period, whereas Phase 2 showed the more skilled and higher proficiency period, with a significant reduction in OT (90±29 minutes versus 55±20 minutes; P<.0001). The two phases did not differ significantly with respect to patient characteristics and other perioperative parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Mastery of operative technique for ESD of SMTs is evident by a decrease in OT identified by CUSUM graphs. For endoscopists competent in basic endoscopic intervention skills, the learning curve should be achieved after approximately 32 cases. Offering this minimally invasive endoscopic intervention does not result in increased complication rate even in the early phase of the learning curve.