Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prostataeingriffe im Rahmen der urologischen Facharztweiterbildung

Prostate surgery within residency programs in urology

  • GeSRU
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Literatur

  1. Boehm K, Beyer B, Schneidewind L et al (2013) Transrectal ultrasound in prostate cancer patients: what can we really see?. Urologe A 52:1712–1714

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Salem J, Wilisch J, Ruf C (2013) GeSRU residents training curriculum 2014. Urologe A 44:7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Del Rosso A, Masciovecchio S, Paradiso Galatioto G et al (2013) Resident training in urology: bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate – a safe method in learning endoscopic surgical procedure. Arch Ital Urol Androl 85:78–81

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zhu H, Zhang Y, Liu JS et al (2013) Virtual reality simulator for training urologists on transurethral prostatectomy. Chin Med J 126:1220–1223

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schout BM, Bemelmans BL, Martens EJ et al (2009) How useful and realistic is the uro trainer for training transurethral prostate and bladder tumor resection procedures? J Urol 181:1297–1303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schout BM, Hendrikx AJ, Scherpbier AJ et al (2008) Update on training models in endourology: a qualitative systematic review of the literature between January 1980 and April 2008. Eur Urol 54:1247–1261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gill JD, Stewart LF, George NJ et al (2012) Operative experience of urological trainees in the UK. BJU Int 109:1296–1301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Huri E, Acar C, Binbay M et al (2009) Evaluation of residencies‘ in Turkey. The first report of the ESRU questionnaire in the Europe ‚home version. Urol Int 83:206–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Muschter R, Bach T, Seitz M (2013) Transurethral resection of the prostate and current modifications (bipolar, electrovaporization). Urologe A 52:331–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fechner G, Schaupp J, Hauser S et al (2012) Educating transurethral electroresection of the prostate is safe and efficient: is training a risk factor for patients and hospitals? Urologe A 51:1572–1575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Furuya S, Furuya R, Ogura H et al (2006) A study of 4,031 patients of transurethral resection of the prostate performed by one surgeon: learning curve, surgical results and postoperative complications. Hinyokika Kiyo 52:609–614

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mccullough TC, Heldwein FL, Soon SJ et al (2009) Laparoscopic versus open simple prostatectomy: an evaluation of morbidity. J Endourol 23:129–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yuh B, Laungani R, Perlmutter A et al (2008) Robot-assisted Millin’s retropubic prostatectomy: case series. Can J Urol 15:4101–4105

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hoag NA, Mamut A, Afshar K et al (2012) Trends in urology resident exposure to minimally invasive surgery for index procedures: a tale of two countries. J Surg Educ 69:670–675

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mamut AE, Afshar K, Mickelson JJ et al (2011) Surgical case volume in Canadian urology residency: a comparison of trends in open and minimally invasive surgical experience. J Endourol 25:1063–1067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Torricelli FC, Guglielmetti G, Duarte RJ et al (2011) Laparoscopic skill laboratory in urological surgery: tools and methods for resident training. Int Braz J Urol 37:108–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Do M et al (2006) Modular training for residents with no prior experience with open pelvic surgery in endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 49:491–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. Johannes Bründl, Friedemann Zengerling, Hendrik Borgmann und Isabella Syring geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie, Caritas-Krankenhaus St. Josef, Universität Regensburg, Landshuter Straße 65, 93053, Regensburg, Deutschland

    J. Bründl

  2. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland

    F. Zengerling

  3. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Deutschland

    H. Borgmann

  4. Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland

    I. Syring

  5. Abteilung für Prostatakarzinom-Forschung, Institut für Pathologie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland

    I. Syring

Authors
  1. J. Bründl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Zengerling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Borgmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. Syring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Bründl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bründl, J., Zengerling, F., Borgmann, H. et al. Prostataeingriffe im Rahmen der urologischen Facharztweiterbildung. Urologe 53, 379–381 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3424-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3424-5

Search

Navigation