Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Review of the use of simulators in learning revascularization techniques

  • Review Article
  • Published:
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The apprentice model has been traditionally used to train cardiac surgery and cardiology learners the techniques for revascularization with the use of simulators recently becoming more prevalent in these training programs. This review aims to summarize research conducted on the use of simulation-based teaching (SBT) for trainees learning percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and off-pump CABG (OPCAB).

Recent findings

Prior literature evaluating the utility of SBT has demonstrated remarkable results including reduced procedural times, use of fluoroscopy, incidence of mistakes, improved stent placement, and confidence with PCI simulators. Similarly, the use of CABG and OPCAB simulators demonstrated improvement in forceps use, needle angles, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill, and reduced completion times.

Summary

The apprentice model has undoubtedly been successful as the most successful cardiac surgeons and cardiologists have been produced through this training model. Even so, many shortcomings have been identified including insufficient time to teach all relevant technical skills, inadequate exposure to rare adverse events, high-cost, and often unstructured format while being time-consuming and resource-intensive with little objective assessment of proficiency. SBT has been pursued as a potential adjunct to fill the gaps left by the traditional apprentice model. While simulations have been demonstrated to be successful in teaching both experienced and inexperienced learners complex techniques, it is unlikely that training will ever solely rely on simulations. The most efficient method of training learners for revascularization in the future will likely involve a combination of hands-on learning and SBT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Malakar AK, Choudhury D, Halder B, Paul P, Uddin A, Chakraborty S. A review on coronary artery disease, its risk factors, and therapeutics. J Cell Physiol. 2019;234:16812–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauersachs R, Zeymer U, Brière J, Marre C, Bowrin K, Huelsebeck M. Burden of coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease: a literature review. Cardiovasc Ther. 2019;2019:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Mancini GBJ, Gosselin G, Chow B, Kostuk W, Stone J, Yvorchuk KJ, et al. Canadian cardiovascular society guidelines for the diagnosis and management of stable ischemic heart disease. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30:837–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yanagawa B, Ribeiro R, Naqib F, Fann J, Verma S, Puskas J. See one, simulate many, do one, teach one: cardiac surgical simulation. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2019;34:571–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wu J, Wang H, Zhang P, Ma X, Hu Q. A preliminary real-time and realistic simulation environment for percutaneous coronary intervention. BioMed Res Int. 2015;2015:183157–210.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Rocha e Silva R, Lourenção J, Artur Goncharov M, Jatene FB. Low cost simulator for heart surgery training. Rev Bras Cir Cardiov. 2016;31:449–53.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Green SM, Klein AJ, Pancholy S, Rao SV, Steinberg D, Lipner R, et al. The current state of medical simulation in interventional cardiology: A clinical document from the society for cardiovascular angiography and intervention’s (SCAI) simulation committee. Catheter Cardio Inte. 2014;83:37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Maluf MA, Gomes WJ, Bras AM, de Araújo TCVN, et al. Cardiovascular surgery residency program: Training coronary anastomosis using the arroyo simulator and UNIFESP models. Braz J Cardiov Surg. 2015;30:562–70.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Tradigo G, Vizza P, Fragomeni G, Veltri P. On the reliability of measurements for a stent positioning simulation system. Int J Med Inform. 2019;123:23–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jannati M, Navaei MR, Ronizi LG. A comparative review of the outcomes of using arterial versus venous conduits in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8:2768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Trehan K, Kemp CD, Yang SC. Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: Where do we stand? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147(18):24.e2.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fann JI, Calhoon JH, Carpenter AJ, Merril WH, Brown JW, Poston RS, et al. Simulation in coronary artery anastomosis early in cardiothoracic surgical residency training: The boot camp experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;139:1275–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ito J, Shimamoto T, Sakaguchi G, Komiya T. Impact of novel off-pump coronary artery bypass simulator on the surgical training. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;61:270–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bouma W, Kuijpers M, Bijleveld A, De Maat GE, Koene BM, Erasmus ME, et al. A new beating-heart off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting training model. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015;20:7–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu X, Yang Y, Meng Q, Sun J, Luo F, Cui Y, et al. A secure and high-fidelity live animal model for off-pump coronary bypass surgery training. J Surg Educ. 2016;73:583–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Voelker W, Petri N, Tönissen C, Störk S, Birkemeyer R, Kaiser E, et al. Does simulation-based training improve procedural skills of beginners in interventional cardiology? A stratified randomized study. J Interv Cardiol. 2016;29:75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gurm HS, Sanz-Guerrero J, Johnson DD, Jensen A, Seth M, Chetcuti SJ, Lalonde T, et al. Using simulation for teaching femoral arterial access: a multicentric collaboration. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:376–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Casey DB, Stewart D, Vidovich MI. Diagnostic coronary angiography: initial results of a simulation program. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016;17:102–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schimmel DR, Sweis R, Cohen ER, Davidson C, Wayne DB. Targeting clinical outcomes: endovascular simulation improves diagnostic coronary angiography skills. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:383–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Price J, Naik V, Boodhwani M, Brandys T, Hendry P, Lam BK. A randomized evaluation of simulation training on performance of vascular anastomosis on a high-fidelity in vivo model: The role of deliberate practice. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142:496–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nesbitt JC, St Julien J, Absi TS, Ahmad RM, Grogan EL, Balaguer JM, et al. Tissue-based coronary surgery simulation: Medical student deliberate practice can achieve equivalency to senior surgery residents. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145:1453–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Anand J, Doberne J, Wojnarski CM, Smith PK. & Zwischenberger BA. Coronary anastomosis simulation: Directed interventions to optimize success. Ann Thorac Surg; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fann JI, Caffarelli AD, Georgette G, Howard SK, Gaba DM, Youngblood P, et al. Improvement in coronary anastomosis with cardiac surgery simulation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;136:1486–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. EL-Andari R, Bozso S, Kang J, & Nagendran J. A comparison of surgical, total percutaneous, and hybrid approaches to treatment of combined coronary artery and valvular heart disease. Curr Opin Cardiol 2020;35:559–65.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Ryaan EL-Andari & Jimmy J. H. Kang

  2. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Sabin J. Bozso & Jeevan Nagendran

Authors
  1. Ryaan EL-Andari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sabin J. Bozso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jimmy J. H. Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jeevan Nagendran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeevan Nagendran.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

EL-Andari, R., Bozso, S.J., Kang, J.J.H. et al. Review of the use of simulators in learning revascularization techniques. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 69, 415–424 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-020-01577-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-020-01577-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation