Residency Training in Robotic General Surgery: A Survey of Program Directors

The evidence behind robot-assisted abdominopelvic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite recent advancements, the advantage of robotic surgery over other traditional modalities still harbors academic inquiries. We seek to take a recently published high-profile narrative systematic review regarding robotic surgery and add meta-analytic tools to identify further benefits of robotic surgery.

METHODS

Data from the published systematic review were extracted and meta-analysis were performed. A fixed-effect model was used when heterogeneity was not significant (Chi2 p ≥ 0.05, I2 ≤ 50%) and a random-effects model was used when heterogeneity was significant (Chi2 p < 0.05, I2 > 50%). Forest plots were generated using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Robotic surgery had comparable overall complications compared to laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.85), which was significantly lower compared to open surgery (odds ratio 0.68, p = 0.005). Compared to laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery had fewer open conversions (risk difference - 0.0144, p = 0.03), shorter length of stay (mean difference - 0.23 days, p = 0.01), but longer operative time (mean difference 27.98 min, p < 0.00001). Compared to open surgery, robotic surgery had less estimated blood loss (mean difference - 286.8 mL, p = 0.0003) and shorter length of stay (mean difference - 1.69 days, p = 0.001) with longer operative time (mean difference 44.05 min, p = 0.03). For experienced robotic surgeons, there were less overall intraoperative complications (risk difference - 0.02, p = 0.02) and open conversions (risk difference - 0.03, p = 0.04), with equivalent operative duration (mean difference 23.32 min, p = 0.1) compared to more traditional modalities.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that compared to laparoscopy, robotic surgery may improve hospital length of stay and open conversion rates, with added benefits in experienced robotic surgeons showing lower overall intraoperative complications and comparable operative times.

Trends in Comprehensive Thoracic Case Experience Among General Surgery Residents in the Modern Integrated Cardiothoracic Residency Era: Review of Twenty Years of Resident Case Logs

BACKGROUND

Thoracic surgery training among general surgery residents in the United States is regulated by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to ensure exposure to subspecialty fields during residency. Thoracic surgery training has changed over time with the placement of work hour restrictions, the emphasis on minimally invasive surgery, and increased subspecialization of training like integrated six-year cardiothoracic surgery programs. We aim to investigate how these changes over the past twenty years have affected thoracic surgery training among general surgery residents.

METHODS

ACGME general surgery resident case logs from 1999 to 2019 were reviewed. Data included exposure to the thorax via thoracic, cardiac, vascular, pediatric, trauma, and alimentary tract procedures. Cases from the above categories were consolidated to determine the comprehensive experience. Descriptive statistics were performed over four 5-year Eras (Era 1:1999-2004, Era 2: 2004-2009, Era 3: 2009-2014, Era 4: 2014-2019).

RESULTS

Between Era 1 and Era 4, there was an increase in thoracic surgery experience (37.6 ± 1.03 vs 39.3 ± .64; P = .006). The mean total thoracic experience for thoracoscopic, open, and cardiac procedures was 12.89 ± 3.76, 20.09 ± 2.33, and 4.98 ± 1.28, respectively. There was a difference between Era 1 and Era 4 in thoracoscopic (8.78 ± .961 vs 17.18 ± .75; P < .001) and open thoracic experience (22 ± .97 vs 17.06 ± .88; P < .001), and a decrease in thoracic trauma procedures (3.7 ± .06 vs 3.2 ± .32; P = .03).

DISCUSSION

Over twenty years there has been a similar, to slight increase in thoracic surgery exposure among general surgery residents. The changes seen in thoracic surgery training reflect the overall movement of surgery towards minimally invasive surgery.

Home practice for robotic surgery: a randomized controlled trial of a low-cost simulation model

Pre-operative simulated practice allows trainees to learn robotic surgery outside the operating room without risking patient safety. While simulation practice has shown efficacy, simulators are expensive and frequently inaccessible. Cruff (J Surg Educ 78(2): 379-381, 2021) described a low-cost simulation model to learn hand movements for robotic surgery. Our study evaluates whether practice with low-cost home simulation models can improve trainee performance on robotic surgery simulators. Home simulation kits were adapted from those described by Cruff (J Surg Educ 78(2): 379-381, 2021). Hand controllers were modified to mimic the master tool manipulators (MTMs) on the da Vinci Skills Simulator (dVSS). Medical students completed two da Vinci exercises: Sea Spikes 1 (SS1) and Big Dipper Needle Driving (BDND). They were subsequently assigned to either receive a home simulation kit or not. Students returned two weeks later and repeated SS1 and BDND. Overall score, economy of motion, time to completion, and penalty subtotal were collected, and analyses of covariance were performed. Semi-structured interviews assessed student perceptions of the robotic simulation experience. Thirty-three medical students entered the study. Twenty-nine completed both sessions. The difference in score improvement between the experimental and control groups was not significant. In interviews, students provided suggestions to increase fidelity and usefulness of low-cost robotic home simulation. Low-cost home simulation models did not improve student performance on dVSS after two weeks of at-home practice. Interview data highlighted areas to focus future simulation efforts. Ongoing work is necessary to develop low-cost solutions to facilitate practice for robotic surgery and foster more inclusive and accessible surgical education.

Multidisciplinary perceptions on robotic surgical training: the robot is a stimulus for surgical education change

BACKGROUND

It is unclear how to best establish successful robotic training programs or if subspecialty robotic program principles can be adapted for general surgery practice. The objective of this study is to understand the perspectives of high-volume robotic surgical educators on best practices in robotic surgery training and to provide recommendations transferable across surgical disciplines.

METHODS

This multi-institutional qualitative analysis involved semi-structured interviews with high-volume robotic educators from academic general surgery (AGS), community general surgery (CGS), urology (URO), and gynecology (GYN). Purposeful sampling and snowballing ensured high-volume status and geographically balanced representation across four strata. Interviews were transcribed, deidentified, and independently, inductively coded. A codebook was developed and refined using constant comparative method until interrater reliability kappa reached 0.95. A qualitative thematic, framework analysis was completed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four interviews were completed: AGS (n = 9), CGS (n = 8), URO (n = 9), and GYN (n = 8) resulting in 40 codes and four themes. Theme 1: intangibles of culture, resident engagement, and faculty and administrative buy-in are as important as tangibles of robot and simulator access, online modules, and case volumes. Theme 2: robotic OR integration stresses the trainee-autonomy versus patient-safety balance. Theme 3: trainees acquire robotic skills along individual learning curves; benchmark assessments track progress. Theme 4: AGS can learn from URO and GYN through multidisciplinary collaboration but must balance pre-existing training program use with context-specific curricular needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgical experts emphasize the importance of universal training paradigms, such as a strong educational culture that balances autonomy and patient safety, collaboration between disciplines, and routine assessments for continuous growth. Often, introduction and acceptance of the robot serves as a stimulus to discuss broader surgical education change.

Robotic surgery training curricula: prevalence, perceptions, and educational experiences in general surgery residency programs

BACKGROUND

Utilization of robotics in general surgery has increased exponentially in the past decade. The purpose of this study was to provide an updated analysis of the prevalence of robotic training curricula among general surgery residency programs across the United States.

METHODS

A 19-item survey was distributed to program directors of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery email list. The survey focused on the programs' demographics, program directors' opinions of robotic surgery, and status of robotic surgery curricula. Data was compiled and analyzed using Qualtrics Survey Software, Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSS. Chi-Squared statistical significance was defined as a p value of < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 280 program directors, 107 (38.2%) responded. Overall, 75 (70%) residency programs provided a formal robotic surgery curriculum. Regarding the importance of robotics to general surgery training, 67 (89%) programs that provided a formal robotic surgery curriculum stated it was either 'Very important' or 'Probably important' as opposed to 23 (72%) programs that did not offer a formal robotic surgery curriculum (p = 0.017). 73 of the 75 residency programs with a formal robotic surgery training curriculum answered the curriculum specific questions. 58 (79%) had been present for 3 years or less. Bedside assisting began in 62 (85%) programs as a post-graduate year (PGY) 1 or PGY2 and residents began operating on the console as a PGY2 or PGY3 in 53 (72%) programs. However, there was variability regarding the percentage of the case a senior resident actually operated on the robotic console.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of general surgery residency programs offer formal robotic surgery curricula and have been present for 3 years or less. Most residencies begin their curricula in PGY1 or PGY2 year, with an opportunity to bedside assist and operate on the robotic console in the first 3 years of residency. Operative barriers and defined milestones for general surgery trainees need to be identified.

Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Hepatic Surgery: An Historical Review

Hepatic surgery is a rapidly expanding component of abdominal surgery and is performed for a wide range of indications. The introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 1987 was a major change in abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was widely and rapidly adopted throughout the world for cholecystectomy initially and then applied to a variety of other procedures. Laparoscopic surgery became regularly applied to hepatic surgery, including segmental and major resections as well as organ donation. Many operations progressed from open surgery to laparoscopy to robot-assisted surgery, including colon resection, pancreatectomy, splenectomy thyroidectomy, adrenalectomy, prostatectomy, gastrectomy, and others. It is difficult to prove a data-based benefit using robot-assisted surgery, although laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery of the liver are not inferior regarding major outcomes. When laparoscopic surgery initially became popular, many had concerns about its use to treat malignancies. Robot-assisted surgery is being used to treat a variety of benign and malignant conditions, and studies have shown no deterioration in outcomes. Robot-assisted surgery for the treatment of malignancies has become accepted and is now being used at more centers. The outcomes after robot-assisted surgery depend on its use at specialized centers, the surgeon's personal experience backed up by extensive training and maintenance of international registries. Robot-assisted hepatic surgery has been shown to be associated with slightly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital lengths of stay compared to open surgery. Oncologic outcomes have been maintained, and some studies show higher rates of R0 resections. Patients who need surgery for liver lesions should identify a surgeon they trust and should not be concerned with the specific operative approach used. The growth of robot-assisted surgery of the liver has occurred in a stepwise approach which is very different from the frenzy that was seen with the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This approach allowed the identification of areas for improvement, many of which are at the nexus of engineering and medicine. Further improvements in robot-assisted surgery depend on the combined efforts of engineers and surgeons.

Attitudes towards and impact of letters of recommendation for anesthesiology residency applicants

Background: This survey aims to identify the relative value and the critical components of anesthesiology letters of recommendation(LORs) from the perspective of Program Directors (PDs) and Associate/Assistant Program Directors (APDs). Knowledge and insights originating from this survey might add to the understanding of the anesthesiology residency selection process and mitigate unintended linguistic biases.Methodology: Anonymous online surveys were sent to anesthesiology PDs/APDs from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited anesthesiology residency Programs in the USA (US), as listed on the ACGME website and the American Medical Association Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (AMA FREIDA) Residency Program Database. The survey authors were blinded to the identity of the respondents.Results: 62 out of 183 (33.8%) invited anesthesiology PDs/APDs completed the survey anonymously. In our survey, LORs are reported as more important in granting an interview than in making the rank list. 64% of respondents prefer narrative LORs. 77.4% of respondents look for specific keywords in LORs. Keywords such as 'top % of students' and 'we are recruiting this candidate' indicate a strong letter of recommendation while keywords such as 'I recommend to your program' or non-superlative descriptions indicate a weak letter of recommendation. Other key components of LORs include the specialty of the letter-writer, according to 84% of respondents, with anesthesiology as the most valuable specialty. Although narrative LORs are preferred, 55.1% of respondents are not satisfied with the content of narrative LORs.Conclusion: LORs containing specific keywords play an important role in the application to anesthesiology residency, particularly when submitted by an anesthesiologist. While narrative LORs are still the preferred format, most of our respondents feel they need improvements. The authors suggest specific LOR improvements including creating formalized LOR training, adding a style guide, and applying comparative scales, with standardized vocabulary in the narrative LOR.

Public Perceptions of General Surgery Residency Training

OBJECTIVE

Patients are integral to surgical training. Understanding our patients' perceptions of surgical training, resident involvement and autonomy is crucial to optimizing surgical education and thus patient care. In the modern, connected world many factors extrinsic to a patient's experience of healthcare may influence their opinion of our training systems (i.e., social media, television shows, and internet searches). The purpose of this article is to contextualize the literature investigating public perceptions of general surgery training to allow us to effect patient education initiatives to optimize both surgical training and patient safety.

DESIGN

This is a perspective including a literature review summarizing the current knowledge of public perceptions of general surgery training.

CONCLUSIONS

Little is published regarding patient and public perceptions of general surgery residency training and the role of residents within this. Current literature demonstrates that the majority of patients are willing to have residents participate in their care. Patients' attitude toward resident involvement in their operation is improved by utilizing educational materials and by ensuring a supervising attending is present within the operating room. These observations, coupled with future work to delve deeper into factors affecting public perceptions of surgical training and resident involvement within this, can guide strategies to improve surgical education.

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Case-Control Outcome Analysis and Surgical Resident Training Implications

Background

The robotic approach in surgery is becoming more widely used in many subspecialties. Robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures provide potential improvements in clinical outcomes due to improved visualization and enhanced surgical ergonomics. In this study, we measured and compared outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy with the conventional laparoscopic technique, as well as the implications for the training of surgical residents.

Method

We compared a total of 244 patients undergoing minimally invasive cholecystectomies performed by one surgeon between July 2013 and June 2016 examining relevant clinical outcomes including operative room (OR) time, length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission to the hospital, post-operative emergency department (ED) visits, and post-operative pain between laparoscopic single-incision cholecystectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A chi-square test and Student’s t-test were used to compare these variables between the two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used using gender, age, and body mass index (BMI) as variables.

Results

From the total number of procedures of 244, 144 were included in the laparoscopic group and 100 in the robot-assisted group. The robot-assisted patients had a shorter post-operative LOS (mean: 0.8 vs. 1.6 days; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the OR time (mean: 64.8 vs. 65.0 minutes; p = 0.945), readmissions (4.0% vs. 3.5%; p = 0.830), post-operative ED visits (7.0% vs. 7.6%; p = 0.851), or post-operative pain (13.0% vs. 21.3%; p= 0.137). Robotic cholecystectomy patients were younger (mean: 46 vs. 52 years; p = 0.023) and had lower BMIs (mean: 31 vs. 33; p = 0.038). Because of these differences, we compared the two groups using PSM that confirmed the shorter LOS in the robotic group (mean: 0.9 vs. 1.9; p = 0.009).

Conclusions

These results demonstrate that robotic cholecystectomies can reduce LOS for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, without increasing OR time. Increased surgeon experience with robotic procedures and improved OR efficiency will allow greater opportunities for resident participation. Robotic training curricula need to be employed and objectively evaluated to improve surgical resident skill acquisition and provide earlier and progressive clinical participation in robotic procedures.

General surgery training in the era of robotic surgery: a qualitative analysis of perceptions from resident and attending surgeons

BACKGROUND

The use of the surgical robot has increased annually since its introduction, especially in general surgery. Despite the tremendous increase in utilization, there are currently no validated curricula to train residents in robotic surgery, and the effects of robotic surgery on general surgery residency training are not well defined. In this study, we aim to explore the perceptions of resident and attending surgeons toward robotic surgery education in general surgery residency training.

METHODS

We performed a qualitative thematic analysis of in-person, one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with general surgery residents and attending surgeons at a large academic health system. Convenient and purposeful sampling was performed in order to ensure diverse demographics, experiences, and opinions were represented. Data were analyzed continuously, and interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached, which occurred after 20 residents and seven attendings.

RESULTS

All interviewees agreed that dual consoles are necessary to maximize the teaching potential of the robotic platform, and the importance of simulation and simulators in robotic surgery education is paramount. However, further work to ensure proper access to simulation resources for residents is necessary. While most recognize that bedside-assist skills are essential, most think its educational value plateaus quickly. Lastly, residents believe that earlier exposure to robotic surgery is necessary and that almost every case has a portion that is level-appropriate for residents to perform on the robot.

CONCLUSIONS

As robotic surgery transitions from novelty to ubiquity, the importance of effective general surgery robotic surgery training during residency is paramount. Through in-depth interviews, this study provides examples of effective educational tools and techniques, highlights the importance of simulation, and explores opinions regarding the role of the resident in robotic surgery education. We hope the insights gained from this study can be used to develop and/or refine robotic surgery curricula.

A Standardized Robotic Training Curriculum in a General Surgery Program

Background and Objectives:

The general surgery residency at the University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria has a long tradition of integrating robotic surgery into training since 2002. The purpose of this paper is to investigate our curriculum and evaluation system, which was designed to achieve a standardized format for education in general robotic surgery.

Methods:

The curriculum consists of two phases: phase 1 (PGY 1–2): Complete 4 robotic surgery training modules; read two assigned robotic surgery articles; and practice simulation modules on the robot. phase 2 (PGY 3–5): Refresh training modules, score >90% on the simulator modules every 6 months; bedside assist minimum of 4 robotic procedures; and act as console surgeon for a minimum of 10 procedures with 2 separate attending surgeons. The required simulator modules were specially selected to incorporate all of the skills categories documented in the simulator. The faculty evaluate the resident's operative performance using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills validated rubric.

Results:

Since the curriculum was instituted in June 2017, 73 evaluations from 8 surgeons have been collected. We examined data from 6 residents who had at least 5 Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills assessments completed. Correlation coefficient scores showed a positive correlation ranging from 0.476 to 0.862 for average skills and 0.334 to 0.866 for overall performance scores.

Discussion:

The preliminary results suggest an improvement of resident robotic surgical skills through tailored education. This curriculum is designed to enhance robotic general surgery education that could potentially produce general surgeons able to operate robotically without needing a robotic/MIS (Minimally Invasive Surgery) fellowship.

Making the Jump: A Qualitative Analysis on the Transition From Bedside Assistant to Console Surgeon in Robotic Surgery Training

OBJECTIVE

To determine barriers associated with the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon for general surgery residents in the era of robotic surgery in general surgery training.

DESIGN

Qualitative thematic analysis using one-on-one interviews of general surgery residents and attendings conducted between June 2018 and February 2019.

SETTING

An urban, academic, multihospital general surgery residency program with a robust robotic surgery program.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenient and purposeful sampling was performed to ensure a variety of resident graduate-years and attending subspecialties were represented. Sample size was determined by data saturation, which occurred after 20 resident and 7 attending interviews.

RESULTS

Residents identified the low volume of general surgery robotic cases, the infrequency of exposure to robotic surgery, and attending comfort with robotic surgery (and with teaching on the robot) as potential barriers in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Residents had to find a replacement bedside assistant in order to be the console surgeon, which was challenging. In addition, residents felt that the current culture surrounding robotic surgery is very hierarchal, limiting their exposure. Attendings' trust in the residents' console skills was a major determining factor in allowing residents on the console.

CONCLUSIONS

Most robotic surgery education curricula are sequential, requiring the resident to progress from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Unfortunately, there are many potential barriers for residents in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Some barriers apply to general surgery training overall, but are amplified in robotic surgery, while others are unique to robotic surgery education. Recognition of, and rectifying, these barriers may increase resident participation as the console surgeon.

Robotic and laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas: an historical review

Surgery of the pancreas is a relatively new field, with operative series appearing only in the last 50 years. Surgery of the pancreas is technically challenging. The entire field of general surgery changed radically in 1987 with the introduction of the laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Minimally Invasive surgical techniques rapidly became utilized worldwide for gallbladder surgery and were then adapted to other abdominal operations. These techniques are used regularly for surgery of the pancreas including distal pancreatectomy and pancreatoduodenectomy. The progression from open surgery to laparoscopy to robotic surgery has occurred for many operations including adrenalectomy, thyroidectomy, colon resection, prostatectomy, gastrectomy and others. Data to show a benefit to the patient are scarce for robotic surgery, although both laparoscopic and robotic surgery of the pancreas have been shown not to be inferior with regard to major operative and oncologic outcomes. While there were serious concerns when laparoscopy was first used in patients with malignancies, robotic surgery has been used in many benign and malignant conditions with no obvious deterioration of outcomes. Robotic surgery for malignancies of the pancreas is well accepted and expanding to more centers. The importance of centers of excellence, surgeon experience supported by a codified mastery-based training program and international registries is widely accepted. Robotic pancreatic surgery is associated with slightly decreased blood loss and decreased length of stay compared to open surgery. Major oncologic outcomes appear to have been preserved, with some studies showing higher rates of R0 resection and tumor-free margins. Patients with lesions of the pancreas should find a surgeon they trust and do not need to be concerned with the operative approach used for their resection. The step-wise approach that has characterized the growth in robotic surgery of the pancreas, in contradistinction to the frenzy that accompanied the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, has allowed the identification of areas for improvement, many of which lie at the junction of engineering and medical practice. Refinements in robotic surgery depend on a partnership between engineers and clinicians.