Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Training for New Techniques and Robotic Surgery in Minimal Access Surgery

  • Chapter
Training in Minimal Access Surgery

  • 785 Accesses

Abstract

Introduction of new techniques and technologies should be accomplished safely and efficiently, and without compromising patient safety and outcomes. Standardized curricula with simulation-based components for training are required in this evolving field of minimal access surgery. Procedural training which is carried out in a step-by-step manner using proctoring, mentoring, video review, and live surgery demonstrations is also essential.

This chapter describes educational and training modalities for new minimal access surgery and robotic surgery that will support establishment of optimal training programmes.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Mohan HM, O’Riordan JM, Winter DC. Natural-orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): minimally invasive evolution or revolution? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013;23:244–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chukwumah C, Zorron R, Marks JM, Ponsky JL. Current status of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Curr Probl Surg. 2010;47:630–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmed I, Ciancio F, Ferrara V, Jorgensen LN, Mann O, Morales-Conde S, Paraskeva P, Vestweber B, Weiss H. Current status of single-incision laparoscopic surgery: European experts’ views. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2012;22:194–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, Crouzet S, Stein RJ. Robotic single-port transumbilical surgery in humans: initial report. BJU Int. 2009;103:366–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J, Son DN, Baek SJ, Cho JS. Robotic vs laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:151–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH. A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2485–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Baek SJ, Lee DW, Park SS, Kim SH. Current status of robot-assisted gastric surgery. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2011;3:137–43.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Oropesa I, Sánchez-González P, Lamata P, Chmarra MK, Pagador JB, Sánchez-Margallo JA, Sánchez-Margallo FM, Gómez EJ. Methods and tools for objective assessment of psychomotor skills in laparoscopic surgery. J Surg Res. 2011;171:e81–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fried MP, Satava R, Weghorst S, Gallagher AG, Sasaki C, Ross D, Sinanan M, Uribe JI, Zeltsan M, Arora H, Cuellar H. Identifying and reducing errors with surgical simulation. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13 Suppl 1:i19–26.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. The American Board of Surgery Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery course is available at http://www.absurgery.org. Last accessed 20 Aug 2013.

  11. Stelzer MK, Abdel MP, Sloan MP, Gould JC. Dry lab practice leads to improved laparoscopic performance in the operating room. J Surg Res. 2009;154:163–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Scott DJ, Dunnington GL. The new ACS/APDS skills curriculum: moving the learning curve out of the operating room. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:213–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Scott DJ, Bergen PC, Rege RV, Laycock R, Tesfay ST, Valentine RJ, Euhus DM, Jeyarajah DR, Thompson WM, Jones DB. Laparoscopic training on bench models: better and more cost effective than operating room experience? J Am Coll Surg. 2000;191:272–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, Satava RM. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236:458–63.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee BR, Caddedu JA, Janetschek G, Schulam P, Docimo SG, Moore RG, Partin AW, Kavoussi LR. International surgical telemonitoring: our initial experience. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1998;50:41–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Caddedu JA, Kondraske GV. Human performance testing and simulators. J Endourol. 2007;21:300–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rehring ST, Powers K, Jones DB. Integrating simulation in surgery as a teaching tool and credentialing standard. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:222–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Subramonian K, Muir G. The ‘learning curve’ in surgery: what is it, how do we measure it and can we influence it? BJU Int. 2004;93:1173–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P. Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg. 2004;91:146–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abboudi H, Khan MS, Aboumarzouk O, Guru KA, Challacombe B, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K. Current status of validation for robotic surgery simulators – a systematic review. BJU Int. 2013;111:194–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Brown-Clerk B, Siu KC, Katsavelis D, Lee I, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N. Validating advanced robot-assisted laparoscopic training task in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;132:45–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mukherjee M, Siu KC, Suh IH, Klutman A, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N. A virtual reality training program for improvement of robotic surgical skills. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;142:210–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Suh IH, Siu KC, Mukherjee M, Monk E, Oleynikov D, Stergiou N. Consistency of performance of robot-assisted surgical tasks in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;142:369–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lallas CD, Davis JW, Members Of The Society Of Urologic Robotic Surgeons. Robotic surgery training with commercially available simulation systems in 2011: a current review and practice pattern survey from the society of urologic robotic surgeons. J Endourol. 2012;26:283–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 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;73:1288–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lendvay TS, Casale P, Sweet R, Peters C. Initial validation of a virtual-reality robotic simulator. J Robot Surg. 2008;2:145–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lendvay TS, Casale P, Sweet R, Peters C. VR robotic surgery: randomized blinded study of the dV-Trainer robotic simulator. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;132:242–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sethi AS, Peine WJ, Mohammadi Y, Sundaram CP. Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator. J Endourol. 2009;23:503–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mehrabi A, Yetimoglu CL, Nickkholgh A, Kashfi A, Kienle P, Konstantinides L, Ahmadi MR, Fonouni H, Schemmer P, Friess H, Gebhard MM, Büchler MW, Schmidt J, Gutt CN. Development and evaluation of a training module for the clinical introduction of the da Vinci robotic system in visceral and vascular surgery. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1376–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hanly EJ, Marohn MR, Bachman SL, Talamini MA, Hacker SO, Howard RS, Schenkman NS. Multiservice laparoscopic surgical training using the daVinci surgical system. Am J Surg. 2004;187:309–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vlaovic PD, Sargent ER, Boker JR, Corica FA, Chou DS, Abdelshehid CS, White SM, Sala LG, Chu F, Le T, Clayman RV, McDougall EM. Immediate impact of an intensive one-week laparoscopy training program on laparoscopic skills among postgraduate urologists. JSLS. 2008;12:1–8.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Udomsawaengsup S, Pattana-arun J, Tansatit T, Pungpapong SU, Navicharern P, Sirichindakul B, Nonthasoot B, Park-art R, Sriassadaporn S, Kyttayakerana K, Wongsaisuwan M, Rojanasakul A. Minimally invasive surgery training in soft cadaver (MIST-SC). J Med Assoc Thai. 2005;88:S189–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharma M, Horgan A. Comparison of fresh-frozen cadaver and high-fidelity virtual reality simulator as methods of laparoscopic training. World J Surg. 2012;36:1732–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zorn KC, Gautam G, Shalhav AL, Clayman RV, Ahlering TE, Albala DM, Lee DI, Sundaram CP, Matin SF, Castle EP, Winfield HN, Gettman MT, Lee BR, Thomas R, Patel VR, Leveillee RJ, Wong C, Badlani GH, Rha KH, Eggener SE, Wiklund P, Mottrie A, Atug F, Kural AR, Joseph JV, Members of 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;182:1126–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Macafee DA. Is there a role for mentoring in Surgical Specialty training? Med Teach. 2008;30:e55–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hanly EJ, Miller BE, Kumar R, Hasser CJ, Coste-Maniere E, Talamini MA, Aurora AA, Schenkman NS, Marohn MR. Mentoring console improves collaboration and teaching in surgical robotics. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2006;16:445–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. O’Leary DP, Corrigan MA, McHugh SM, Hill AD, Redmond HP. From theater to the world wide web–a new online era for surgical education. J Surg Educ. 2012;69:483–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Knapp H, Chan K, Anaya HD, Goetz MB. Interactive internet-based clinical education: an efficient and cost-savings approach to point-of-care test training. Telemed J E Health. 2011;17:335–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Roshier AL, Foster N, Jones MA. Veterinary students’ usage and perception of video teaching resources. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11:1–13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. McDougall EM, Corica FA, Chou DS, Abdelshehid CS, Uribe CA, Stoliar G, Sala LG, Khonsari SS, Eichel L, Boker JR, Ahlering TE, Clayman RV. Short-term impact of a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy ‘mini-residency’ experience on postgraduate urologists’ practice patterns. Int J Med Robot. 2006;2:70–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Eliyahu S, Roguin A, Kerner A, Boulos M, Lorber A, Halabi M, Suleiman M, Nikolsky E, Rispler S, Beyar R. Patient safety and outcomes from live case demonstrations of interventional cardiology procedures. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:215–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Duty B, Okhunov Z, Friedlander J, Okeke Z, Smith A. Live surgical demonstrations: an old, but increasingly controversial practice. Urology. 2012;79:1185.e7–11.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine/MIS & Robotic Surgery Center, Korea University Medical Center, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, South Korea

    Jung-Myun Kwak MD, PhD

  2. Division of Upper GI Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine/ MIS & Robotic Surgery Center, Korea University Medical Center, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, South Korea

    Sungsoo Park MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Jung-Myun Kwak MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sungsoo Park MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sungsoo Park MD, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. NHS Foundation Trust, Yeovil District Hospital, Yeovil, United Kingdom

    Nader Francis

  2. Poissy Cedex, France

    Abe Fingerhut

  3. Stony Brook Medicine, New York, New York, USA

    Roberto Bergamaschi

  4. Colchester General Hospital, Colchester, Essex, United Kingdom

    Roger Motson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kwak, JM., Park, S. (2015). Training for New Techniques and Robotic Surgery in Minimal Access Surgery. In: Francis, N., Fingerhut, A., Bergamaschi, R., Motson, R. (eds) Training in Minimal Access Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6494-4_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6494-4_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6493-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6494-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation