Simulation in Surgical Oncology and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery

  • Kimberly M. BrownEmail author
Part of the Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation book series (CHS)


Surgical oncology encompasses the surgical treatment of malignancies of the skin, soft tissue, breast, gastrointestinal tract, head and neck, and thorax. Many of these anatomic locations are covered in other chapters of this book and will not be discussed further here. The focus of this chapter is on the role of simulation in acquiring and maintaining technical skills around liver, biliary, and pancreas surgery. The discussion points will include contexts in which simulation plays a role in hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery, the modalities used for simulation-based training, curricula that have been described, and research priorities to further the meaningful application of simulation to improve the quality of training and patient outcomes in HPB surgery.


Simulation Simulation-based training Surgery Surgical oncology Liver surgery Pancreas surgery Biliary surgery Laparoscopic surgery Robotic surgery 


  1. 1.
    Boone BA, et al. Assessment of quality outcomes for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: identification of the learning curve. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(5):416–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shakir M, et al. The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic Centre. HPB (Oxford). 2015;17(7):580–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown KM, Geller DA. What is the learning curve for laparoscopic major hepatectomy? J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(5):1065–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vigano L, et al. The learning curve in laparoscopic liver resection: improved feasibility and reproducibility. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):772–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wakabayashi G, et al. Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka. Ann Surg. 2015;261(4):619–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang YJ, Mittal VK. Hepato-pancreato-biliary training in general surgery residency: is it enough for the real world? Am J Surg. 2009;197(3):291–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Daee SS, et al. Analysis and implications of changing hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) case loads in general surgery residency training for HPB surgery accreditation. HPB (Oxford). 2013;15(12):1010–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Malangoni MA, et al. Operative experience of surgery residents: trends and challenges. J Surg Educ. 2013;70(6):783–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Committee, I.E.a.T. Standards for hepato-pancreato-biliary training; 2008 [cited 26 Sept 2016]. Available from:
  10. 10.
    Bell RH Jr, et al. Operative experience of residents in US general surgery programs: a gap between expectation and experience. Ann Surg. 2009;249(5):719–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fong Y, et al. Long-term survival is superior after resection for cancer in high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2005;242(4):540–4. discussion 544-7PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Langer B. Role of volume outcome data in assuring quality in HPB surgery. HPB (Oxford). 2007;9(5):330–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van der Geest LG, et al. Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2016;18(4):317–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen CC, et al. Warm-up on a simulator improves residents’ performance in laparoscopic surgery: a randomized trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(10):1615–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deuchler S, et al. Clinical efficacy of simulated vitreoretinal surgery to prepare urgeons for the upcoming intervention in the operating room. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0150690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee JY, et al. Laparoscopic warm-up exercises improve performance of senior-level trainees during laparoscopic renal surgery. J Endourol. 2012;26(5):545–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Palter VN, et al. Ex vivo technical skills training transfers to the operating room and enhances cognitive learning: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2011;253(5):886–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chipman JG, Schmitz CC. Using objective structured assessment of technical skills to evaluate a basic skills simulation curriculum for first-year surgical residents. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209(3):364–370 e2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Korndorffer JR Jr, et al. The American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in surgery National Skills Curriculum: adoption rate, challenges and strategies for effective implementation into surgical residency programs. Surgery. 2013;154(1):13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scott DJ, Goova MT, Tesfay ST. A cost-effective proficiency-based knot-tying and suturing curriculum for residency programs. J Surg Res. 2007;141(1):7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hsu JL, Korndorffer JR Jr, Brown KM. Design of vessel ligation simulator for deliberate practice. J Surg Res. 2015;197(2):231–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hsu JL, Korndorffer JR Jr, Brown KM. Force feedback vessel ligation simulator in knot-tying proficiency training. Am J Surg. 2016;211(2):411–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Narumi S, et al. Introduction of a simulation model for choledocho- and pancreaticojejunostomy. Hepato-Gastroenterology. 2012;59(119):2333–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pugh CM, et al. Faculty evaluation of simulation-based modules for assessment of intraoperative decision making. Surgery. 2011;149(4):534–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sidhu HS, et al. Role of simulation-based education in ultrasound practice training. J Ultrasound Med. 2012;31(5):785–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Terkamp C, et al. Simulation of abdomen sonography. Evaluation of a new ultrasound simulator. Ultraschall Med. 2003;24(4):239–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Martin RC 2nd, et al. Irreversible electroporation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a call for standardization of energy delivery. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(7):865–71.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scheffer HJ, et al. Colorectal liver metastatic disease: efficacy of irreversible electroporation--a single-arm phase II clinical trial (COLDFIRE-2 trial). BMC Cancer. 2015;15:772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hildebrand P, et al. Development of a perfused ex vivo tumor-mimic model for the training of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(10):1745–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scott DM, et al. Development of an in vivo tumor-mimic model for learning radiofrequency ablation. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4(6):620–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ali J, et al. Potential role of the advanced surgical skills for exposure in trauma (ASSET) course in Canada. J Trauma. 2011;71(6):1491–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bowyer MW, et al. Advanced surgical skills for exposure in trauma (ASSET): the first 25 courses. J Surg Res. 2013;183(2):553–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kirkpatrick AW, et al. The marriage of surgical simulation and telementoring for damage-control surgical training of operational first responders: a pilot study. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;79(5):741–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    White SA, et al. A cadaver lab training facility to facilitate laparoscopic liver resection. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2014;24(4):357–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu JS, et al. Laparoscopic hepatic lobectomy in the porcine model. Surg Endosc. 1998;12(3):232–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Prasad Rai B, et al. A qualitative assessment of human cadavers embalmed by Thiel's method used in laparoscopic training for renal resection. Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5(3):182–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Teh SH, Hunter JG, Sheppard BC. A suitable animal model for laparoscopic hepatic resection training. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(10):1738–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Carey JN, et al. Perfused fresh cadavers: method for application to surgical simulation. Am J Surg. 2015;210(1):179–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Delpech PO, et al. SimLife a new model of simulation using a pulsated revascularized and reventilated cadaver for surgical education. J Visc Surg. 2017;154(1):15–20.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Faure JP, et al. SIM life: a new surgical simulation device using a human perfused cadaver. Surg Radiol Anat. 2017;39(2):211–7.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Condino S, et al. How to build patient-specific synthetic abdominal anatomies. An innovative approach from physical toward hybrid surgical simulators. Int J Med Robot. 2011;7(2):202–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cameron BH, O'Regan PJ, Anderson DL. A pig model for advanced laparoscopic biliary procedures. Surg Endosc. 1994;8(12):1423–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Watson DI, Treacy PJ, Williams JA. Developing a training model for laparoscopic common bile duct surgery. Surg Endosc. 1995;9(10):1116–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sanchez A, et al. Development of a training model for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. JSLS. 2010;14(1):41–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Teitelbaum EN, et al. A simulator-based resident curriculum for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Surgery. 2014;156(4):880–7, 890–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Burdall OC, et al. 3D printing to simulate laparoscopic choledochal surgery. J Pediatr Surg. 2016;51(5):828–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bric JD, et al. Current state of virtual reality simulation in robotic surgery training: a review. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(6):2169–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Moglia A, et al. A systematic review of virtual reality simulators for robot-assisted surgery. Eur Urol. 2016;69(6):1065–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery and Perioperative CareUniversity of Texas at Austin Dell Medical SchoolAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations