Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning curves and surgical outcomes for proctored adoption of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: cumulative sum curve analysis

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is an effective and well-recognised treatment for symptoms of obstructive defecation in the context of rectal prolapse and recto-rectal intussusception. However, due to the technical complexity of VMR, a significant learning curve has been previously described. This paper examines the effect of proctored adoption of VMR on learning curves, operative times, and outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective database analysis of two district general hospitals was conducted, with inclusion of all cases performed by two surgeons since first adoption of the procedure in 2007–2015. Operative time, length of stay, and in-hospital complications were evaluated, with learning curves assessed using cumulative sum curves.

Results

Three hundred and eleven patients underwent VMR during the study period and were included for analysis. Patients were near-equally distributed between surgeons (surgeon A: n = 151, surgeon B, n = 160) with no significant differences between gender, age, or ASA grade. In-hospital morbidity was 3.2 %, with 0 % mortality. Cumulative sum curve analysis suggested a change point of between 25 and 30 cases based on operative times and length of stay and was similar between both surgeons. No significant change point was seen for morbidity or mortality.

Conclusion

VMR is an effective and safe treatment for rectal prolapse. Surgeons in this study were proctored during the adoption process by another surgeon experienced in VMR; this may contribute to increased safety and abbreviated learning curve. In the context of proctored adoption, this study estimates a learning curve of 25–30 cases, without detrimental impact on patient outcomes.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D’Hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F (2004) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 91:1500–1505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. van den Esschert JW, van Geloven AA, Vermulst N, Groenedijk AG, de Wit LT, Gerhards MF (2008) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for obstructed defecation syndrome. Surg Endosc 22:2728–2732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Eu KW, Seow-Choen F (1997) Functional problems in adult rectal prolapse and controversies in surgical treatment. Br J Surg 84:904–911

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Consten EC, van Iersel JJ, Verheijen PM, Broeders IA, Wolthuis AM, D’Hoore A (2015) Long-term outcome after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: an observational study of 919 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 262:742–747 (discussion 747–748)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wijffels N, Cunningham C, Dixon A, Greenslade G, Lindsey I (2011) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse is safe and effective in the elderly. Does this make perineal procedures obsolete? Colorectal Dis 13:561–566

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hobbs MS, Mai Q, Knuiman MW, Fletcher DR, Ridout SC (2006) Surgeon experience and trends in intraoperative complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 93:844–853

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zevin B, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP (2012) Simulation-based training and learning curves in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Br J Surg 99:887–895

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Miskovic D, Ni M, Wyles SM, Tekkis P, Hanna GB (2012) Learning curve and case selection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and international multicenter analysis of 4852 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 55:1300–1310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Harrysson IJ, Cook J, Sirimanna P, Feldman LS, Darzi A, Aggarwal R (2014) Systematic review of learning curves for minimally invasive abdominal surgery: a review of the methodology of data collection, depiction of outcomes, and statistical analysis. Ann Surg 260:37–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Novick RJ, Stitt LW (1999) The learning curve of an academic cardiac surgeon: use of the CUSUM method. J Card Surg 14:312–320 (discussion 321–312)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Novick RJ, Fox SA, Stitt LW, Kiaii BB, Abu-Khudair W, Lee A, Benmusa A, Swinamer SA, Rayman R, Menkis AH, McKenzie FN, Quantz MA, Boyd WD (2002) Effect of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on risk-adjusted and cumulative sum failure outcomes after coronary artery surgery. J Card Surg 17:520–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mackenzie H, Dixon AR (2014) Proficiency gain curve and predictors of outcome for laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Surgery 156:158–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Royston CM, Lansdown MR, Brough WA (1994) Teaching laparoscopic surgery: the need for guidelines. BMJ 308:1023–1025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Novick RJ, Fox SA, Stitt LW, Kiaii BB, Swinamer SA, Rayman R, Wenske TR, Boyd WD (2002) Assessing the learning curve in off-pump coronary artery surgery via CUSUM failure analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 73:S358–S362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ni M, Mackenzie H, Widdison A, Jenkins JT, Mansfield S, Dixon T, Slade D, Coleman MG, Hanna GB (2016) What errors make a laparoscopic cancer surgery unsafe? An ad hoc analysis of competency assessment in the National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in England. Surg Endosc 30:1020–1027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mackenzie H, Cuming T, Miskovic D, Wyles SM, Langsford L, Anderson J, Thomas-Gibson S, Valori R, Hanna GB, Coleman MG, Francis N (2015) Design, delivery, and validation of a trainer curriculum for the national laparoscopic colorectal training program in England. Ann Surg 261:149–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh P, Aggarwal R, Tahir M, Pucher PH, Darzi A (2015) A randomized controlled study to evaluate the role of video-based coaching in training laparoscopic skills. Ann Surg 261:862–869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bonrath EM, Dedy NJ, Gordon LE, Grantcharov TP (2015) Comprehensive surgical coaching enhances surgical skill in the operating room: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 262:205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Johnston MJ, Singh P, Pucher PH, Fitzgerald JE, Aggarwal R, Arora S, Darzi A (2015) Systematic review with meta-analysis of the impact of surgical fellowship training on patient outcomes. Br J Surg 102:1156–1166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mercer-Jones MA, D’Hoore A, Dixon AR, Lehur P, Lindsey I, Mellgren A, Stevenson AR (2014) Consensus on ventral rectopexy: report of a panel of experts. Colorectal Dis 16:82–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boons P, Collinson R, Cunningham C, Lindsey I (2010) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse improves constipation and avoids de novo constipation. Colorectal Dis 12:526–532

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Laubert T, Kleemann M, Schorcht A, Czymek R, Jungbluth T, Bader FG, Bruch HP, Roblick UJ (2010) Laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a single-center study during 16 years. Surg Endosc 24:2401–2406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Dorchester, UK

    Philip H. Pucher & Michael J. Lamparelli

  2. Division of Surgery and Cancer, St Mary’s Hospital, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, London, W2 1NY, UK

    Philip H. Pucher

  3. Department of Surgery, Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK

    Damian Mayo & Andrew Clarke

  4. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, UK

    Anthony R. Dixon

Authors
  1. Philip H. Pucher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Damian Mayo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anthony R. Dixon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael J. Lamparelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip H. Pucher.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Pucher, Mayo, Dixon, Lamparelli, and Clarke declare no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pucher, P.H., Mayo, D., Dixon, A.R. et al. Learning curves and surgical outcomes for proctored adoption of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: cumulative sum curve analysis. Surg Endosc 31, 1421–1426 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5132-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5132-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation