Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 25, Issue 5, pp 1677–1682 | Cite as

Development of an ex vivo simulated training model for laparoscopic liver resection

  • Andrew Strickland
  • Katherine Fairhurst
  • Chris Lauder
  • Peter Hewett
  • Guy Maddern
New Technology



The number of patients who have undergone laparoscopic liver surgery has increased in the last 15 years. It is technically challenging surgery, requiring both advanced laparoscopic and liver resection skills. Surgeons often require familiarisation with much of the equipment and techniques used in this type of surgery. No ex vivo model currently exists for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of this study was to develop a model for acquiring the technical skills involved in LLR that was also able to assess and measure surgical performance.


The ProMIS augmented reality surgical simulator was selected because performance data other than time could be obtained, and the simulator was adapted to create the laparoscopic trainer. Twenty candidates with differing laparoscopic surgical experience tested the model. Three groups were identified, novice, intermediate, and expert, according to previous exposure to the laparoscopic tasks. Candidates were required to identify a tumour ultrasonographically, mark and transect ex vivo liver, and perform two laparoscopic stitches with intracorporeal knots. The ProMIS recorded the performance data, including instrument path lengths and time.


Measurements taken from the ProMIS simulator were analysed for statistical differences between the groups. Expert surgeons showed a statistically significant difference in the time taken to identify the liver lesion and transect the organ. The results also demonstrate that the more difficult tasks such as laparoscopic suturing are completed by the expert surgeons with statistically significant shorter times and path lengths compared to the less experienced surgeons.


The adapted ProMIS augmented reality simulator provided junior surgeons with a realistic learning environment in which to familiarise themselves with the equipment and techniques required for LLR. The model also allows assessment of the performance of individuals over time and within a peer group. Construct validity is proven for the suturing component of the model.


Laparoscopic liver resection Surgical simulation Simulation training 


  1. 1.
    Giger UF, Michel JM, Opitz I, Th Inderbitzin D, Kocher T, Krahenbuhl L, Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery (SALTS) Study Group (2006) Risk factors for perioperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: analysis of 22, 953 consecutive cases from the Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery database. J Am Coll Surg 203:723–728PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kapischke M, Caliebe A, Tepel J, Schulz T, Hedderich J (2006) Open versus laparoscopic appendicectomy a critical review. Surg Endosc 20:1060–1068PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uranues S, Alimoglu O (2005) Laparoscopic surgery of the spleen. Surg Clin North Am 85:75–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF, Frampton CM, Frizelle FA, Rieger NA, Smith JS, Solomon MJ, Stephens JH, Stevenson AR (2008) Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the ALCCaS trial. Ann Surg 248:728–738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vigano L, Tayar C, Laurent A, Cherqui D (2009) Laparoscopic liver surgery: a systematic review. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 16:410–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wattiez A, Cohen SB, Selvaggi L (2002) Laparoscopic hysterectomy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 14:417–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nguyen KT, Gamblin TC, Geller DA (2009) World review of laparoscopic liver resection—2084 patients. Ann Surg 250:831–841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vigano L, Laurent A, Tayar C, Tomatis M, Ponti A, Cherqui D (2009) The learning curve in laparoscopic liver resection. Ann Surg 250:772–782PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Derossis AM, Fried GM, Abrahamowicz M, Sigman HH, Barkun JS, Meakins JL (1998) Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg 175:482–487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Gitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518-525 (discussion 525–528)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Francis NK, Hanna GB, Jakimowicz JJ (2005) Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Surg Endosc 19:1523–1532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sutherland LM, Middleton PF, Anthony A, Hamdorf J, Cregan P, Scott D, Maddern GJ (2006) Surgical simulation: a systematic review. Ann Surg 243:291–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    American College of Surgeons, ACS/APDS Surgical Skills Curriculum for Residents. Available at (accessed 9 December 2009)
  14. 14.
    Gurusamy KS, Aggarwal R, Palanivelu L, Davidson BR (2009) Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD006575Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Larsen CR, Soerensen JL, Grantcharov TP, Dalsgaard T, Schouenborg L, Ottosen C, Schroeder TV, Ottesen BS (2009) Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 338:b1802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sturm LP, Windsor JA, Cosman PH, Cregan P, Hewett PJ, Maddern GJ (2008) A systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation training. Ann Surg 248:166–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Surgical Science, The LapSim System. Available at Accessed 9 December 2009
  18. 18.
    Haptica, The world-leading ProMIS Surgical Simulator. Available at Accessed 9 December 2009
  19. 19.
    Duffy AJ, Hogle NJ, McCarthy H, Lew JI, Egan A, Christos P, Fowler DL (2005) Construct validity for the LAPSIM laparoscopic surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 19:401–405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Sickle KR, McClusky DA, Gallagher AG, Smith CD (2007) Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task. Surg Endosc 19:1227–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Strickland
    • 1
  • Katherine Fairhurst
    • 1
  • Chris Lauder
    • 1
  • Peter Hewett
    • 1
  • Guy Maddern
    • 1
  1. 1.The Queen Elizabeth HospitalUniversity of Adelaide Discipline of SurgeryWoodville SouthAustralia

Personalised recommendations