Abstract
Background
With the increasing use of the surgical robotic system in the clinical arena, appropriate training programs and assessment systems need to be established for mastery of this new technology. The authors aimed to design and evaluate a clinic-like training program for the clinical introduction of the da Vinci robotic system in visceral and vascular surgery.
Methods
Four trainees with different surgical levels of experience participated in this study using the da Vinci telemanipulator. Each participant started with an initial evaluation stage composed of standardized visceral and vascular operations (cholecystectomy, gastrotomy, anastomosis of the small intestine, and anastomosis of the aorta) in a porcine model. Then the participants went on to the training stage with the rat model, performing standardized visceral and vascular operations (gastrotomy, anastomosis of the large and small intestines, and anastomosis of the aorta) four times in four rats. The final evaluation stage was again identical to the initial stage. The operative times, the number of complications, and the performance quality of the participants were compared between the two evaluation stages to assess the impact of the training stage on the results.
Results
The operative times in the final evaluation stage were considerably shorter than in the initial evaluation stage and, except for cholecystectomies, all the differences reached statistical significance. Also, significantly fewer complications and improved quality for each operation in the final evaluation stage were documented, as compared with their counterparts in the initial evaluation stage. These improvements were recorded at each level of experience.
Conclusions
The presented experimental small and large animal model is a standardized and reproducible training method for robotic surgery that allows evaluation of the surgical performance while shortening and optimizing the learning-curve.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring: review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 16: 1389–1402
Ballantyne GH, Kelley WE Jr (2002) Granting clinical privileges for telerobotic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12: 17–25
Berguer R (1999) Surgery and ergonomics. Arch Surg 134: 1011–1016
Bonatti J, Schachner T, Bernecker O, Chevtchik O, Bonaros N, Ott H, Friedrich G, Weidinger F, Laufer G (2004) Robotic totally endoscopic CAB: program development and learning curve issues. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 127: 504–510
Boyd WD, Desai ND, Kiaii B, Rayman R, Menkis AH, McKenzie FN, Novick RJ (2000) A comparison of robot-assisted versus manually constructed endoscopic coronary anastomosis Ann Thorac Surg 70: 839–842, discussion 842–843
Buess GF, Schurr MO, Fischer SC (2000) Robotics and allied technologies in endoscopic surgery. Arch Surg 135: 229–235
Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O, Izizaw R, Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Capelluto E, Bruyns J (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25: 1467–1477
Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, Bruyns J, Fourtanier G (1999) Nissen fundoplication done by remotely controlled robotic technique. Ann Chir 53: 137–141
Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, Favretti F (1999) The world’s first obesity surgery performed by a surgeon at a distance. Obes Surg 9: 206–209
Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, Settembre A, Miranda N, Amato F, Pirozzi F, Caiazzo P (2005) Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc 19: 117–119
Dakin GF, Gagner M (2003) Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc 17: 574–579
Damiano RJ Jr, Tabaie HA, Mack MJ, Edgerton JR, Mullangi C, Graper WP, Prasad SM (2001) Initial prospective multicenter clinical trial of robotically-assisted CAB grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 72: 1263–1268, discussion 1268–1269
Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N (1999) Assessing operative skill: needs to become more objective. BMJ 318: 887–888
Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Huong PT, Cadiere GB (2000) Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study. Fertil Steril 74: 1020–1023
Deziel DJ, Millikan KW, Economou SG, Doolas A, Ko ST, Airan MC (1993) Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a national survey of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases. Am J Surg 165: 9–14
Di Lorenzo N, Coscarella G, Faraci L, Konopacki D, Pietrantuono M, Gaspari AL (2005) Robotic systems and surgical education. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 9: 3–12
Falk V, Diegler A, Walther T, Autschbach R, Mohr FW (2000) Developments in robotic cardiac surgery. Curr Opin Cardiol 15: 378–387
Gallagher AG, Richie K, McClure N, McGuigan J (2001) Objective psychomotor skills assessment of experienced, junior, and novice laparoscopists with virtual reality. World J Surg 25: 1478–1483
Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Champion H, Higgins G, Fried MP, Moses G, Smith CD, Satava RM (2005) VR simulation for the operating room: proficiency-based training as a paradigm shift in surgical skills training. Ann Surg 241: 364–372
Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi A, Schemmer P, Buchler MW (2004) Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 91: 1390–1397
Hanly EJ, Marohn MR, Bachman SL, Talamini MA, Hacker SO, Howard RS, Schenkman NS (2004) Multiservice laparoscopic surgical training using the daVinci surgical system. Am J Surg 187: 309–315
Hanly EJ, Zand J, Bachman SL, Marohn MR, Talamini MA (2005) Value of the SAGES Learning Center in introducing new technology. Surg Endosc 19: 477–483
Hashizume M, Tsugawa K (2004) Robotic surgery and cancer: the present state, problems, and future vision. Jpn J Clin Oncol 34: 227–237
Hernandez JD, Bann SD, Munz Y, Moorthy K, Datta V, Martin S, Dosis A, Bello F, Darzi A, Rockall T (2004) Qualitative and quantitative analysis of learning curve of a simulated surgical task on da Vinci system. Surg Endosc 18: 372–378
Himpens J, Leman G, Cadiere GB (1998) Telesurgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 12: 1091
Hubert J, Feuillu B, Mangin P, Lobontiu A, Artis M, Villemot JP (2003) Laparoscopic computer-assisted pyeloplasty: the results of experimental surgery in pigs. BJU Int 92: 437–440
Moorthy K, Munz Y, Dosis A, Hernandez J, Martin S, Bello F, Rockall T, Darzi A (2004) Dexterity enhancement with robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 18: 790–795
Newlin ME, Mikami DJ, Melvin SW (2004) Initial experience with the four-arm computer-enhanced telesurgery device in foregut surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14: 121–124
Niemeyer G, Kuchenbecker KJ, Bonneau R, Mitra P, Reid AM, Fiene J, Weldon G (2004) THUMP: an immersive haptic console for surgical simulation and training. Stud Health Technol Inform 98: 272–274
Nifong LW, Chitwood WR Jr (2004) Building a surgical robotics program. Am J Surg 188 (4A Suppl): 16S–18S
Nio D, Balm R, Maartense S, Guijt M, Bemelman WA (2004) The efficacy of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic vascular anastomoses in an experimental model. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 27: 283–286
Nio D, Bemelman WA, Boer KT, Dunker MS, Gouma DJ, Gulik TM (2002) Efficiency of manual versus robotical (Zeus)-assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16: 412–415
Ramsay CR, Grant AM, Wallace SA, Garthwaite PH, Monk AF, Russell IT (2000) Assessment of the learning curve in health technologies: a systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 16: 1095–1108
Ro CY, Toumpoulis I, Ashton R Jr, Imielinska C, Jebara T, Shin SH, Zipkin J, McGinty J, Todd G, Derose J Jr (2005) A novel drill set for the enhancement and assessment of robotic surgical performance. Stud Health Tech Inform 111: 418–421
Ruurda JP, Broeders IA, Pulles B, Kappelhof FM, van der Werken C (2004) Manual robot-assisted endoscopic suturing: time-action analysis in an experimental model. Surg Endosc 18: 1249–1252
Ruurda JP, van Vroonhoven TJ, Broeders IA (2002) Robot-assisted surgical systems: a new era in laparoscopic surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84: 223–226
Sarle R, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Peabody J, Menon M (2004) Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills. J Endourol 18: 63–66, discussion 66–67
Stewart L, Way LW (1995) Bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: factors that influence the results of treatment. Arch Surg 130: 1123–1128, discussion 1129
Weiss H, Ortmaier T, Maass H, Hirzinger G, Kuehnapfel U (2003) A virtual reality–based haptic surgical training system. Comput Aided Surg 8: 269–272
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mehrabi, A., Yetimoglu, C.L., Nickkholgh, A. et al. Development and evaluation of a training module for the clinical introduction of the da Vinci robotic system in visceral and vascular surgery. Surg Endosc 20, 1376–1382 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0612-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0612-9