Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A cost-effective model for training in Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy

  • IUJ Video
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The number of robotically assisted sacrocolpopexy procedures are increasing; therefore, experienced clinicians are needed. Simulation-based cadaver models are challenging in aspects of cost and availability. Therefore, we need to look at alternative and more cost-effective models.

Objective

The objective of this video was to design a new surgical model for the training of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy, which is affordable and accessible.

Methods

We used a whole chicken model to simulate the female pelvic floor. We used Medtronic's Hugo™ RAS system as the robotic console in that procedure. A vaginal cuff was prepared from the proventriculus (stomach), and a Y shaped mesh was secured to the ischium to simulate the sacrocolpopexy procedure.

Conclusion

This model is easily constructed and in our view is cost-effective. We have demonstrated a new valuable education tool that can serve as a practical simulation model to teach the sacrocolpopexy procedure and to improve trainees' skills. A larger cohort study size is essential to demonstrate the learning curve among young trainees using this simulation model.

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

References

  1. Rosero EB, Kho KA, Joshi GP, et al (2013) Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease. Obstetrics Gynecol. 122:. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a4ee4d

  2. Costantini E, Brubaker L, Cervigni M, et al (2016) Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based review and recommendations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproduct Biol. 205

  3. Moy ML, Byun SY (2010) Role of robotic surgery in urogynecologic surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 20

  4. Chapron C, Fauconnier A, Goffinet F, et al (2002) Laparoscopic surgery is not inherently dangerous for patients presenting with benign gynaecologic pathology. Results a Meta-Anal Human Reproduct. 17:. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.5.1334

  5. Gluck O, Blaganje M, Veit-Rubin N, et al (2020) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: A comprehensive literature review on current practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproduct Biol. 245

  6. Prasad SM, Maniar HS, Soper NJ, et al (2002) The effect of robotic assistance on learning curves for basic laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg. 183:. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(02)00871-1

  7. Akl MN, Long JB, Giles DL, et al (2009) Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: Technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc. 23:. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0311-4

  8. Fisher RA, Dasgupta P, Mottrie A, et al (2015) An over-view of robot assisted surgery curricula and the status of their validation. Int J Surg. 13

  9. Linder BJ, Anand M, Weaver AL, et al (2016) Assessing the learning curve of robotic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 27:. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2816-4

  10. Mccarthy CM, O’sullivan OE, O’reilly BA (2020) Simulation training: our passport to a successful future in medicine. BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn. 6

  11. MacCraith E, Forde JC, Davis NF (2019) Robotic simulation training for urological trainees: a comprehensive review on cost, merits and challenges. J Robot Surg. 13

  12. Salameh FT, O'Reilly BA, Balta JY (2020) The cadaver is not dead. Anat Sci Int. 95(4):571–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-020-00534-2

  13. Carey JN, Minneti M, Leland HA, et al (2015) Perfused fresh cadavers: Method for application to surgical simulation. Am J Surg. 210:. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.10.027

  14. Puliatti S, Mazzone E, Amato M, et al (2021) Development and validation of the objective assessment of robotic suturing and knot tying skills for chicken anastomotic model. Surg Endosc. 35:. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07918-5

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urogynaecology, Cork University Maternity Hospital, Cork, Ireland

    Yair Daykan & Barry A O’Reilly

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba, Israel, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Yair Daykan

  3. Department of Urology, OLV, Aalst, Belgium

    Rui Farinha & Alexander Mottrie

  4. ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium

    Rui Farinha & Alexander Mottrie

  5. Department of Urogynecology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, Netherlands

    Steven E Schraffordt

Authors
  1. Yair Daykan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Farinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven E Schraffordt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alexander Mottrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Barry A O’Reilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yair Daykan.

Ethics declarations

Patient consent

Patient consent is not needed as no patient is involved in this study.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Additional information

Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and any accompanying images.

Publisher’s note

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

Supplementary Information

(MP4 77905 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Daykan, Y., Farinha, R., Schraffordt, S.E. et al. A cost-effective model for training in Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 34, 3059–3062 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-023-05604-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-023-05604-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation