Characterizing the Surgeon Learning Curve in Instrumented Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery: Does the Evidence Account for Training and Experience? A Systematic Literature Review

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic literature review was to aggregate all evidence characterizing the learning curve of instrumented minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques in spinal surgery and summarize what, if any, consideration has been given to surgeon training and experience.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

MIS techniques have become prevalent in spine surgery given the ability to diminish the intraoperative footprint, translating to quicker patient recovery, and improved long-term outcomes. However, technical demand on the surgeon can be significant, particularly during the procedural adoption (learning curve) phase. Many studies have sought to quantify the duration and severity of these learning curve phases, with the intent to characterize MIS procedural appropriateness and safety. However, while these studies are robust regarding outcome metrics, it is not well understood whether they adequately characterize surgeon training and experience.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed in the PubMed and MEDLINE databases in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. All inclusion articles were screened for statements regarding surgeon experience/training. Statements were further classified by the types of metrics/variables utilized to establish a contextual history of experience/training. Descriptive statistics were reported.

RESULTS

Initial search criteria yielded 458 articles, 12 met final inclusion. Seven articles (58.3%) attempted a summary statement of experience which acknowledged at least one of the following metrics: total years in practice (41.7%), years/number of cases performed using the traditional/gold-standard technique (16.7%), specification of residency/fellowship training (16.7%), use/nonuse of cadaveric or course/lab training (16.7%), and/or design of operating team (8.3%). No articles considered experience as a quantitative variable in their study analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Spine MIS learning curve studies for instrumented fusion procedures provide inadequate context/characterization of surgeon experience and training. Future efforts leveraging learning curve methodology utilized in other surgical specialties would be beneficial.

Can Intraoperative Video Recordings Contribute to Improving Laparoscopic Percutaneous Extraperitoneal Closure in Children with Inguinal Hernia and Prevent Recurrence? A Pilot Study

Aim: We reviewed intraoperative video recordings (IVRs) of laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (LPEC) for inguinal hernia in children blindly to assess performance. Methods: IVRs of 183 LPEC performed between April 2013 and March 2016, graded by the operating surgeon as difficult (D; n = 8), straightforward (S; n = 96), or easy (E; n = 79), were scored by a panel of reviewers with advanced (group A; >400 LPEC cases; n = 5), intermediate (group I; 50-150 cases; n = 5), and basic (group B; <10 cases; n = 5) experience, according to suturing, dissection plane, vas/vessel dissection, bleeding, and peritoneal injury. They also allocated a recurrence risk rank (RRR; highest = 6; lowest = 1) for each IVR. Mean score variance for each IVR was also compared between reviewers. Results: There was one recurrence (R; 4-year-old male; level E). RRR were: 1, 2, and 2 for reviewers A, I, and B, respectively. Reviewer A scores for "suturing" and "bleeding," and reviewer I scores for "dissection plane" and "peritoneal injury" correlated significantly with RRR. No reviewer B scores correlated with RRR. Score variance between A and I and A and B for cases D1 and D2 were statistically significant. Conclusion: Advanced reviewers showed greatest variance, questioning the validity of whether experience alone improves surgical technique.

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.

Systematic review of learning curves for minimally invasive abdominal surgery: a review of the methodology of data collection, depiction of outcomes, and statistical analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine how minimally invasive surgical learning curves are assessed and define an ideal framework for this assessment.

BACKGROUND

Learning curves have implications for training and adoption of new procedures and devices. In 2000, a review of the learning curve literature was done by Ramsay et al and it called for improved reporting and statistical evaluation of learning curves. Since then, a body of literature is emerging on learning curves but the presentation and analysis vary.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, ERIC, and the Cochrane Library from 1985 to August 2012. The inclusion criteria are minimally invasive abdominal surgery formally analyzing the learning curve and English language. 592 (11.1%) of the identified studies met the selection criteria.

RESULTS

Time is the most commonly used proxy for the learning curve (508, 86%). Intraoperative outcomes were used in 316 (53%) of the articles, postoperative outcomes in 306 (52%), technical skills in 102 (17%), and patient-oriented outcomes in 38 (6%) articles. Over time, there was evidence of an increase in the relative amount of laparoscopic and robotic studies (P < 0.001) without statistical evidence of a change in the complexity of analysis (P = 0.121).

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of learning curves is needed to inform surgical training and evaluate new clinical procedures. An ideal analysis would account for the degree of complexity of individual cases and the inherent differences between surgeons. There is no single proxy that best represents the success of surgery, and hence multiple outcomes should be collected.

Laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for inguinal hernia: learning curve for attending surgeons and residents

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (LPEC) for pediatric inguinal hernia is a simple technique in which a purse-string suture made of nonabsorbable material is placed extraperitoneally around the hernia orifice by a special suture needle (Lapaherclosure™). Concerns have been raised about the extensive learning curve for both attending surgeons and residents to master this technique. This study assesses the difference in learning curves for the safe performance of LPEC by attending surgeons and residents.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the surgical charts of 409 consecutive patients (175 girls, 234 boys) who had undergone LPEC for inguinal hernia repair from December 2005 to December 2011 at Jikei University Hospital. The number of operation needed by attending surgeons and residents to reach the appropriate operation time was analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

LPEC was performed by three attending surgeons and four residents who had not previously performed LPEC. The standard operation time for LPEC by attending surgeons who have performed more than 100 LPEC cases safely is 30 min. In our study, the attending surgeons needed a mean of 12 operations (range, 10-16) to reach 30 min for LPEC. Three residents needed a mean of 31 operations (range, 27-33) to reach 30 min for LPEC. The fourth resident could not perform LPEC in 30 min or less. The difference between the number of operations needed by the attending surgeons and the residents to perform LPEC safely was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of contralateral patent processus vaginalis was 47.9 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Our learning curve analysis showed that whereas attending surgeons needed a mean of 12 operations to perform LPEC repairs safely in 30 min or less, residents needed more than 30 operations to safely perform LPEC repairs without supervision.

A randomized clinical trial comparing 4-port, 3-port, and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUNDS

Despite increasing trend in single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC), there is still controversy regarding its global acceptance as a routine practice. Our study aimed to compare surgical events, early in-hospital and later outcomes of SILC with conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

Through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) between June and December 2011, 90 consecutive patients with documented biliary diseases waiting for LC were equally allocated to 3-port, 4-port, and single incision LC group. Operative time, surgical adverse events, postoperative pain according to visual analogue scale (VAS), total morphine administration, length of hospital stay, and cosmetic outcomes were compared between these three groups.

RESULTS

A total of 27 males (30%) and 63 females (70%) were enrolled in this study. The average patients' age and BMI were 42.6 ± 12.1 years and 26.2 ± 2.7 kg/m(2), respectively. Operative time in SILC group was significantly longer than other groups. Total intraoperative adverse events and postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the three groups. Mean ± SD VAS score at rest was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in SILC group. The average VAS at coughing was significantly lower in SILC group in all time intervals except the first 6 hr (p < 0.05). In addition, total morphine dose showed significantly lower amount in SILC group (p = 0.02). 12-month follow-up did not reveal significant difference between the study groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SILC is associated with less postoperative pain in later hours, reduces in-hospital analgesic dosages, has longer procedure time, but does not increase intraoperative and postoperative adverse events It seems that SILC has no obvious advantages in terms of later outcomes.

SILC for SILC: Single Institution Learning Curve for Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Objectives. We report the single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) learning experience of 2 hepatobiliary surgeons and the factors that could influence the learning curve of SILC. Methods. Patients who underwent SILC by Surgeons A and B were studied retrospectively. Operating time, conversion rate, reason for conversion, identity of first assistants, and their experience with previous laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) were analysed. CUSUM analysis is used to identify learning curve. Results. Hundred and nineteen SILC cases were performed by Surgeons A and B, respectively. Eight cases required additional port. In CUSUM analysis, most conversion occurred during the first 19 cases. Operating time was significantly lower (62.5 versus 90.6 min, P = 0.04) after the learning curve has been overcome. Operating time decreases as the experience increases, especially Surgeon B. Most conversions are due to adhesion at Calot's triangle. Acute cholecystitis, patients' BMI, and previous surgery do not seem to influence conversion rate. Mean operating times of cases assisted by first assistant with and without LC experience were 48 and 74 minutes, respectively (P = 0.004). Conclusion. Nineteen cases are needed to overcome the learning curve of SILC. Team work, assistant with CLC experience, and appropriate equipment and technique are the important factors in performing SILC.

Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic fundoplication: a new technique for liver retraction using cyanoacrylate

BACKGROUND/AIM

Single-incision laparoscopic fundoplication is not widespread because of its technical difficulty. An additional stay suture or retractor is often needed for liver retraction during the procedure. Here, we share our 7 cases to demonstrate the feasibility of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic fundoplication with a new technique for liver retraction without any stay suture or retractor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 2010 to October 2011, 3 patients with achalasia underwent a transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic Heller-Dor operation, and 4 patients with hiatus hernia underwent transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic hernioplasty and Nissen fundoplication. The procedures were attempted transumbilically by using three rigid trocars (one was 10 mm, and two were 5 mm) inserted through the 2-cm umbilicus incision. Conventional laparoscopic instruments were used. Adequate retraction of the liver was achieved by binding the lateral left lobe of the liver to the diaphragm with cyanoacrylate.

RESULTS

The pneumoperitoneal time was 115-170 minutes, and blood loss was 15-50 mL. There were no intra- or postoperative complications. The hospital stay was under 6 days for all patients. The umbilical incision healed well with satisfactory cosmetic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic technique in the treatment of achalaisa and hiatus hernia is feasible for an experienced laparoscope surgeon with excellent cosmetic effect. Cyanoacrylate, when used as described, offers a safe and simple solution to the problem of liver retraction, thus obviating the need for a stay suture or liver retractor.

Analysis of perioperative factors and cost comparison of single-incision and traditional multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Recent technological advances in single-incision platforms have allowed many general surgeons to add single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) to their armamentarium. However, adopting new surgical technologies comes at a cost to the patient and the surgeon. This study compared retrospective case-matched SILC and traditional multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MILC) to evaluate the effects of SILC on perioperative outcomes and patient cost.

METHODS

The study compared 50 patients who underwent SILC with a case-matched population of individuals who underwent traditional MILC. The SILC technique was performed using one of three commercially available single-incision platforms currently used for single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) cholecystectomies. All the SILS platforms were placed in a 2-cm supraumbilical incision. All statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel 2008 for Macintosh, with statistical significance determined by a p value of 0.05 or less.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 42 min for the SILC group and 45 min for the MILC group. The difference was not statistically significant. Similarly, the average estimated blood loss was 14 ml for the SILC group and 11 ml for the MILC group. Again, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, the body mass index (BMI) did not differ statistically between the SILC group (28.4 kg/m(2)) and the MILC group (32.2 kg/m(2)). The average patient cost was $18,447 for SILC and $17,701 for MILC, yielding a cost difference of $746. This difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

At the authors' institution, SILS cholecystectomy was performed with blood loss, operating room time, and cost equal to that for MILC. Further research is necessary to assess the economic feasibility of SILC and the trade-off of cost with the improved cosmesis, decreased pain, greater patient satisfaction, reduced postoperative analgesic requirement, and faster return to work to determine the overall value and superiority of SILC compared with MILC.