Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Training, Credentialing, and Hospital Privileging for Robotic Urological Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery

  • 1185 Accesses

Abstract

Robotic surgery has undergone an evolution at an incredible rate in the last decade with robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) now being the most commonly performed robotic procedure. More impressively, as a urologic community, we have witnessed a paradigm shift in that the robotic approach has now become the standard approach for radical prostatectomy in the majority of hospital centers. Although guidelines for the safe initiation of this technology are an overwhelming necessity, unfortunately no standardized credentialing system currently exists to assess competency and safety of the robotic surgeon.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Budäus L, Sun M, Abdollah F, Zorn KC, Morgan M, Johal R, Liberman D, Thuret R, Isbarn H, Salomon G, Haese A, Montorsi F, Shariat SF, Perrotte P, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI. Impact of Surgical Experience on In-Hospital Complication Rates in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Prostatectomy: A Population-Based Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; in press [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-010-1300-0].

    Google Scholar 

  2. Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87:408–410.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pasticier G, Rietbergen JB, Guillonneau B, Fromont G, Menon M, Vallancien G. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol. 2001;40:70–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169:2289–2292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Intuitive Surgical web site. http://www.intuitivesurgical.com. Accessed August 15, 2009.

  6. Steinberg PL, Merguerian PA, Bihrle W III, Seigne JD. The cost of learning robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72:1068–1072.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M. Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer. 2007;110:1951–1958.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hermann TR, Rabenalt R, Stolzenburg JJ, Liatsikos EN, Imkamp F, Tezval H, et al. Oncological and functional results of open, robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does surgical approach and surgical experience matter? World J Urol. 2007;25:149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Boris RS, Kaul SA, Sarle RC, Stricker HJ. Radical prostatectomy: a single surgeon comparison of retropubic, perineal, and robotic approaches. Can J Urol. 2007;14:3566–3570.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K. Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int. 2007;99: 1109–1112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R. Positive margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol. 2006;49:866–871.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ahlering TE, Eichel L, Edwards RA, Lee DI, Skarecky DW. Robotic radical prostatectomy: a technique to reduce pt2 positive margins. Urology. 2004;64:1224–1228.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, Mikhail AA, Gofrit ON, Zagaja GP, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a fellowship – trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol. 2007;21:441–447.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Serio AM, et al. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:1171–1177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Gonen M, et al. Excellent rates of cancer control for patients with organ-confined disease treated by the most experienced surgeons suggest that the primary reason such patients recur is inadequate surgical technique. Eur Urol. 2008;53:960–966.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zorn KC, Wille MA, Thong AE, et al. Continued improvement of perioperative, pathological and continence outcomes during 700 robot assisted radical prostatectomies. Can J Urol. 2009;16:4742–4749.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilt TJ, Shamliyan TA, Taylor BC, MacDonald R, Kane RL. Association between hospital and surgeon radical prostatectomy volume and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Urol. 2008;180:820–829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nuttall M, Van der Meulen J, Phillips N, Sharpin C, Gillatt D, McIntosh G, et al. A systematic review and critique of the literature relating hospital or surgeon volume to health outcomes for 3 urological cancer procedures. J Urol. 2004;172:2145–2152.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Duchene DA, Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, Clayman RV, Winfield HN. Survey of residency training in laparoscopic and robotic surgery. J Urol. 2006;176:2158–2166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rashid HH, Leung YY, Rashid MJ, Oleyourryk G, Valvo JR, Eichel L. Robotic surgical education: a systematic approach to training urology residents to perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2006;68:75–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA, Kalia MS, Pierre SA, Halebilan GE, Sun L, Moul JW, Albala DM. Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss and positive surgical margin rate. Urology. 2008;71:597–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yap SA, Ellison LM, Low RK. Current laparoscopy training in urology: a comparison of fellowships governed by the society of urologic oncology and the endourological society. J Endourol. 2008;22:1755–1760.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gautam G. The current three-year postgraduate program in urology is insufficient to train a urologist. Indian J Urol. 2008;24:336–338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Guzzo TJ, Gonzalgo ML. Robotic surgical training of the urologic oncologist. Urol Oncol. 2009;27:214–217.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA, Kalia MS, Pierre SA, Haleblian GE, et al. Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology. 2008;71:597–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McDougall EM, Corica FA, Chou DS, Abdelshehid CS, Uribe CA, Stoliar G, et al. Short-term impact of a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy ‘mini-residency’ experience on postgraduate urologists’ practice patterns. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg. 2006;2:70–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gamboa AJ, Santos RT, Sargent ER, Louie MK, Box GN, Sohn KH, et al. Long-term impact of a robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy mini fellowship training program on postgraduate urological practice patterns. J Urol. 2009;181:778–782.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wignall GR, Denstedt JD, Preminger GM, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS, Sweet RM, et al. Surgical simulation: a urological perspective. J Urol. 1699;2008(179):1690–1699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Satava RM. Accomplishments and challenges of surgical simulation. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:232–241.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Matsumoto ED, Hamstra SJ, Radomski SB, Cusimano MD. The effect of bench model fidelity on endourological skills: a randomized controlled study. J Urol. 2002;167:1243–1247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Grober ED, Hamstra SJ, Wanzel KR, Reznick RK, Matsumoto ED, Sidhu RS, et al. The educational impact of bench model fidelity on the acquisition of technical skill: the use of clinically relevant outcome measures. Ann Surg. 2004;240:374–381.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kenney PA, Wszolek MF, Gould JJ, Libertino JA, Moinzadeh A. Face, content, and construct validity of dv-trainer, a novel virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery. Urology. 2009;73:1288–1292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sachdeva AK, Russell TR. Safe introduction of new procedures and emerging technologies in surgery: education, credentialing and privileging. Surg Clin N Am. 2007;87:853–866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sachdeva AK. Acquiring skills in new procedures and technology: the challenge and the opportunity. Arch Surg. 2005;140:387–389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Livingston EH, Harwell JD. The medicolegal aspects of proctoring. Am J Surg. 2002;184:26–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sachdeva AK, Blair PG. Enhancing patient safety through educational interventions. In: Manuel BM, Nora PF, eds. Surgical Patient Safety: Essential Information for Surgeons in Today’s Environment. Chicago, IL: American College of Surgeons; 2004:Chapt 14.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ellison LM, Pinto PA, Kim F, Ong AM, Patriciu A, Stoianovici D, et al. Telerounding and patient satisfaction after surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:523–530.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ellison LM, Nguyen M, Fabrizio MD, Soh A, Permpongkosol S, Kavoussi LR. Postoperative robotic telerounding: a multicenter randomized assessment of patient outcomes and satisfaction. Arch Surg. 2007;142:1177–1181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Smith CD, Skandalakis JE. Remote presence proctoring by using a wireless remote-control videoconferencing system. Surg Innov. 2005;12:139–143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Burgess LPA, Syms MJ, Holtel MR, Birkmire-Peters DP, Johnson RE, Ramsey MJ. Telemedicine: teleproctored endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope. 2002;112:216–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zorn KC, Gautam G, Shalhav AL, Clayman RV, Ahlering TE, Albala DM, et al. and The Society of Urologic Robotic Surgeons. Training, credentialing, proctoring and medicolegal risks of robotic urological surgery: recommendations of the society of urologic robotic surgeons. J Urol. 2009;182:1126–1132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sachdeva AK. Invited commentary: educational interventions to address the core competencies in surgery. Surgery. 2004;135:43–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sachdeva AK. Acquisition and maintenance of surgical competence. Semin Vasc Surg. 2002;15:182–190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Verification by the American College of Surgeons for the use of emerging technologies. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1998;83:34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Statements on emerging surgical technologies and the evaluation of credentials. American college of surgeons. Surg Endosc. 1995;9:207–213.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Division of Robotic Surgery, University of Montreal Medical Center, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Kevin C. Zorn

  2. Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA

    Gagan Gautam

Authors
  1. Kevin C. Zorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gagan Gautam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin C. Zorn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Sciences, Dept. Urology, All India Institute of, Ansari Nagar, New Dehli, 110029, India

    Ashok Kumar Hemal

  2. Henry Ford Health System, W. Grand Blvd. 2799, Detroit, 48202, Michigan, USA

    Mani Menon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zorn, K.C., Gautam, G. (2011). Training, Credentialing, and Hospital Privileging for Robotic Urological Surgery. In: Hemal, A., Menon, M. (eds) Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-114-9_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-114-9_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-113-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-114-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation