Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Urologic Surgery Training Using Computer-Assisted Simulators

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advances in Image-Guided Urologic Surgery

  • 1008 Accesses

Abstract

Trainees in urology must overcome many obstacles in order to achieve the skills required to become a competent and credentialed urologist. As urology has advanced in sophistication, the methods of teaching have also adapted and changed. The traditional Halstedian motto of see one, do one, teach one is no longer used on its own to teach trainees but is being augmented with tools such as simulation. Although simulation has been available in forms such as inanimate object manipulation and animal wet labs, only recently have advances in computing allowed for realistic virtual reality simulation to be employed. Computer-assisted simulators are currently available for endourology, laparoscopic surgery, and robotic-assisted surgery. This chapter will discuss the published literature regarding validity of each of the various simulators and the relevance of simulators in each of subspecialty of urology and highlight the importance of simulator use in the education of future trainees.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.00
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. Steinberg PL, Merguerian PA, Bihrle 3rd W, Seigne JD. The cost of learning robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72(5):1068–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Okrainec A, Soper NJ, Swanstrom LL, Fried GM. Trends and results of the first 5 years of Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) certification testing. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(4):1192–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gohil R, Khan RS, Ahmed K, Kumar P, Challacombe B, Khan MS, et al. Urology training: past, present and future. BJU Int. 2012;109(10):1444–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C, Maschino AC, Laudone VP, Dechet CB, et al. Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol. 2012;187(6):2087–92. PubMed PMID: 22498227: Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3407038. Epub 2012/04/14. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmed K, Khan MS, Vats A, Nagpal K, Priest O, Patel V, et al. Current status of robotic assisted pelvic surgery and future developments. Int J Surg Lond Engl. 2009;7(5):431–40. PubMed PMID: 19735746. Epub 2009/09/09. eng.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Monn MF, Bahler CD, Schneider EB, Whittam BM, Misseri R, Rink RC, et al. Trends in robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients. Urology. 2013;81(6):1336–41. PubMed PMID: 23522294. Epub 2013/03/26. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Guzzo TJ, Gonzalgo ML. Robotic surgical training of the urologic oncologist. Urol Oncol. 2009;27(2):214–7. PubMed PMID: 19285237. Epub 2009/03/17. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lucas SM, Gilley DA, Joshi SS, Gardner TA, Sundaram CP. Robotics training program: evaluation of the satisfaction and the factors that influence success of skills training in a resident robotics curriculum. J Endourol. 2011;25(10):1669–74. PubMed PMID: 21815825. Epub 2011/08/06. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mirheydar H, Jones M, Koeneman KS, Sweet RM. Robotic surgical education: a collaborative approach to training postgraduate urologists and endourology fellows. JSLS. 2009;13(3):287–92. PubMed PMID: 19793464. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3015961. Epub 2009/10/02. eng.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 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 Robot. 2006;2(1):70–4. PubMed PMID: 17520615. Epub 2007/05/24. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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(1):75–9. PubMed PMID: 16844450. Epub 2006/07/18. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody JO, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Bhandari A, et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: experience of over 1100 cases. Urol Clin North Am. 2004;31(4):701–17. PubMed PMID: 15474597. Epub 2004/10/12. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Patel VR, Tully AS, Holmes R, Lindsay J. Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting–the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases. J Urol. 2005;174(1):269–72. PubMed PMID: 15947662. Epub 2005/06/11. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman RV. Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;170(5):1738–41. PubMed PMID: 14532766. Epub 2003/10/09. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Herrell SD, Smith Jr JA. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? Urology. 2005;66(5 Suppl):105–7. PubMed PMID: 16194715. Epub 2005/10/01. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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(4):597–601. PubMed PMID: 18387389. Epub 2008/04/05. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Sundaram CP, McDougall EM. Best practices for robotic surgery training and credentialing. J Urol. 2011;185(4):1191–7. PubMed PMID: 21334030. Epub 2011/02/22. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stegemann AP, Ahmed K, Syed JR, Rehman S, Ghani K, Autorino R, et al. Fundamental skills of robotic surgery: a multi-institutional randomized controlled trial for validation of a simulation-based curriculum. Urology. 2013;81(4):767–74. PubMed PMID: 23484743. Epub 2013/03/15. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vlaovic PD, McDougall EM. New age teaching: beyond didactics. Sci World J. 2006;6:2370–80. PubMed PMID: 17619704. Epub 2007/07/11. eng.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Forster JA, Browning AJ, Paul AB, Biyani CS. Surgical simulators in urological training – views of UK Training Programme Directors. BJU Int. 2012;110(6):776–8. PubMed PMID: 22233327. Epub 2012/01/12. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Le CQ, Lightner DJ, VanderLei L, Segura JW, Gettman MT. The current role of medical simulation in American urological residency training programs: an assessment by program directors. J Urol. 2007;177(1):288–91. PubMed PMID: 17162066. Epub 2006/12/13. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosen JM, Long SA, McGrath DM, Greer SE. Simulation in plastic surgery training and education: the path forward. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123(2):729–38. PubMed PMID: 19182636. discussion 39–40; Epub 2009/02/03. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Malone HR, Syed ON, Downes MS, D’Ambrosio AL, Quest DO, Kaiser MG. Simulation in neurosurgery: a review of computer-based simulation environments and their surgical applications. Neurosurgery. 2010;67(4):1105–16. PubMed PMID: 20881575. Epub 2010/10/01. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schreuder HW, Wolswijk R, Zweemer RP, Schijven MP, Verheijen RH. Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review. BJOG. 2012;119(2):137–49. PubMed PMID: 21981104. Epub 2011/10/11. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Modi CS, Morris G, Mukherjee R. Computer-simulation training for knee and shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy. 2010;26(6):832–40. PubMed PMID: 20511043. Epub 2010/06/01. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mabrey JD, Reinig KD, Cannon WD. Virtual reality in orthopaedics: is it a reality? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(10):2586–91. PubMed PMID: 20559765. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3049630. Epub 2010/06/19. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McDougall EM. Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol. 2007;21(3):244–7. PubMed PMID: 17444766. Epub 2007/04/21. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lendvay TS, Brand TC, White L, Kowalewski T, Jonnadula S, Mercer LD, et al. Virtual reality robotic surgery warm-up improves task performance in a dry laboratory environment: a prospective randomized controlled study. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(6):1181–92. PubMed PMID: 23583618. Epub 2013/04/16. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Calatayud D, Arora S, Aggarwal R, Kruglikova I, Schulze S, Funch-Jensen P, et al. Warm-up in a virtual reality environment improves performance in the operating room. Ann Surg. 2010;251(6):1181–5. PubMed PMID: 20485133. Epub 2010/05/21. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Do AT, Cabbad MF, Kerr A, Serur E, Robertazzi RR, Stankovic MR. A warm-up laparoscopic exercise improves the subsequent laparoscopic performance of Ob-Gyn residents: a low-cost laparoscopic trainer. JSLS. 2006;10(3):297–301. PubMed PMID: 17212883. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3015706. Epub 2007/01/11. eng.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Osann KE, Winfield HN, Kahol K, et al. Laparoscopic warm-up exercises improve performance of senior-level trainees during laparoscopic renal surgery. J Endourol. 2012;26(5):545–50. PubMed PMID: 22192095. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3552180. Epub 2011/12/24. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, et al. Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2004;240(3):518–25. discussion 25–8. PubMed PMID: 15319723. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC1356442. Epub 2004/08/21. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Derossis AM, Antoniuk M, Fried GM. Evaluation of laparoscopic skills: a 2-year follow-up during residency training. Can J Surg J Can Chir. 1999;42(4):293–6. PubMed PMID: 10459330. Epub 1999/08/25. eng.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Derossis AM, Fried GM, Abrahamowicz M, Sigman HH, Barkun JS, Meakins JL. Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg. 1998;175(6):482–7. PubMed PMID: 9645777. Epub 1998/06/30. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dauster B, Steinberg AP, Vassiliou MC, Bergman S, Stanbridge DD, Feldman LS, et al. Validity of the MISTELS simulator for laparoscopy training in urology. J Endourol. 2005;19(5):541–5. PubMed PMID: 15989441. Epub 2005/07/02. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Feldman LS, Hagarty SE, Ghitulescu G, Stanbridge D, Fried GM. Relationship between objective assessment of technical skills and subjective in-training evaluations in surgical residents. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198(1):105–10. PubMed PMID: 14698317. Epub 2003/12/31. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Fried GM, Derossis AM, Bothwell J, Sigman HH. Comparison of laparoscopic performance in vivo with performance measured in a laparoscopic simulator. Surg Endosc. 1999;13(11):1077–81. discussion 82. PubMed PMID: 10556441. Epub 1999/11/11. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McCluney AL, Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Cao J, Stanbridge DD, Feldman LS, et al. FLS simulator performance predicts intraoperative laparoscopic skill. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(11):1991–5. PubMed PMID: 17593434. Epub 2007/06/27. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. McDougall EM, Corica FA, Boker JR, Sala LG, Stoliar G, Borin JF, et al. Construct validity testing of a laparoscopic surgical simulator. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;202(5):779–87. PubMed PMID: 16648018. Epub 2006/05/02. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. van Dongen KW, Ahlberg G, Bonavina L, Carter FJ, Grantcharov TP, Hyltander A, et al. European consensus on a competency-based virtual reality training program for basic endoscopic surgical psychomotor skills. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(1):166–71. PubMed PMID: 20574856. Epub 2010/06/25. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Chaudhry A, Sutton C, Wood J, Stone R, McCloy R. Learning rate for laparoscopic surgical skills on MIST VR, a virtual reality simulator: quality of human-computer interface. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1999;81(4):281–6. PubMed PMID: 10615201. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2503263. Epub 2000/01/01. eng.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Grantcharov TP, Kristiansen VB, Bendix J, Bardram L, Rosenberg J, Funch-Jensen P. Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. Br J Surg. 2004;91(2):146–50. PubMed PMID: 14760660. Epub 2004/02/05. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236(4):458–63. discussion 63–4. PubMed PMID: 12368674. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC1422600. Epub 2002/10/09. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Brewin J, Nedas T, Challacombe B, Elhage O, Keisu J, Dasgupta P. Face, content and construct validation of the first virtual reality laparoscopic nephrectomy simulator. BJU Int. 2010;106(6):850–4. PubMed PMID: 20128776. Epub 2010/02/05. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Youngblood PL, Srivastava S, Curet M, Heinrichs WL, Dev P, Wren SM. Comparison of training on two laparoscopic simulators and assessment of skills transfer to surgical performance. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200(4):546–51. PubMed PMID: 15804468. Epub 2005/04/05. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Scott DJ, Bergen PC, Rege RV, Laycock R, Tesfay ST, Valentine RJ, et al. Laparoscopic training on bench models: better and more cost effective than operating room experience? J Am Coll Surg. 2000;191(3):272–83. PubMed PMID: 10989902. Epub 2000/09/16. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Hyltander A, Liljegren E, Rhodin PH, Lonroth H. The transfer of basic skills learned in a laparoscopic simulator to the operating room. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(9):1324–8. PubMed PMID: 11988802. Epub 2002/05/04. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Andreatta PB, Woodrum DT, Birkmeyer JD, Yellamanchilli RK, Doherty GM, Gauger PG, et al. Laparoscopic skills are improved with LapMentor training: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2006;243(6):854–60. discussion 60–3. PubMed PMID: 16772789. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC1570578. Epub 2006/06/15. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Aggarwal R, Ward J, Balasundaram I, Sains P, Athanasiou T, Darzi A. Proving the effectiveness of virtual reality simulation for training in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2007;246(5):771–9. PubMed PMID: 17968168. Epub 2007/10/31. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hamilton EC, Scott DJ, Fleming JB, Rege RV, Laycock R, Bergen PC, et al. Comparison of video trainer and virtual reality training systems on acquisition of laparoscopic skills. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(3):406–11. PubMed PMID: 11928017. Epub 2002/04/03. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Ahlberg G, Enochsson L, Gallagher AG, Hedman L, Hogman C, McClusky 3rd DA, et al. Proficiency-based virtual reality training significantly reduces the error rate for residents during their first 10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Am J Surg. 2007;193(6):797–804. PubMed PMID: 17512301. Epub 2007/05/22. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Larsen CR, Soerensen JL, Grantcharov TP, Dalsgaard T, Schouenborg L, Ottosen C, et al. Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009;338:b1802. PubMed PMID: 19443914. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3273782. Epub 2009/05/16. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Schijven MP, Jakimowicz JJ, Broeders IA, Tseng LN. The Eindhoven laparoscopic cholecystectomy training course – improving operating room performance using virtual reality training: results from the first E.A.E.S. accredited virtual reality trainings curriculum. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(9):1220–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Larsen CR, Oestergaard J, Ottesen BS, Soerensen JL. The efficacy of virtual reality simulation training in laparoscopy: a systematic review of randomized trials. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012;91(9):1015–28. PubMed PMID: 22693954. Epub 2012/06/15. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Preminger GM, Babayan RK, Merril GL, Raju R, Millman A, Merril JR. Virtual reality surgical simulation in endoscopic urologic surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1996;29:157–63. PubMed PMID: 10172841. Epub 1995/12/09. eng.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Shah J, Montgomery B, Langley S, Darzi A. Validation of a flexible cystoscopy course. BJU Int. 2002;90(9):833–5. PubMed PMID: 12460341. Epub 2002/12/04. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Dolmans VE, Schout BM, de Beer NA, Bemelmans BL, Scherpbier AJ, Hendrikx AJ. The virtual reality endourologic simulator is realistic and useful for educational purposes. J Endourol. 2009;23(7):1175–81. PubMed PMID: 19530899. Epub 2009/06/18. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Michel MS, Knoll T, Kohrmann KU, Alken P. The URO mentor: development and evaluation of a new computer-based interactive training system for virtual life-like simulation of diagnostic and therapeutic endourological procedures. BJU Int. 2002;89(3):174–7. PubMed PMID: 11856093. Epub 2002/02/22. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Gettman MT, Le CQ, Rangel LJ, Slezak JM, Bergstralh EJ, Krambeck AE. Development of a standardized curriculum for teaching cystoscopic skills using a computer-based endourologic simulator. Simul Healthc. 2009;4(2):92–7. PubMed PMID: 19444046. Epub 2009/05/16. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Watterson JD, Beiko DT, Kuan JK, Denstedt JD. Randomized prospective blinded study validating acquisition of ureteroscopy skills using computer based virtual reality endourological simulator. J Urol. 2002;168(5):1928–32. PubMed PMID: 12394678. Epub 2002/10/24. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Jacomides L, Ogan K, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Use of a virtual reality simulator for ureteroscopy training. J Urol. 2004;171(1):320–3. discussion 3. PubMed PMID: 14665905. Epub 2003/12/11. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Schout BM, Ananias HJ, Bemelmans BL, d’Ancona FC, Muijtjens AM, Dolmans VE, et al. Transfer of cysto-urethroscopy skills from a virtual-reality simulator to the operating room: a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int. 2010;106(2):226–31. discussion 31. PubMed PMID: 19912184. Epub 2009/11/17. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Manyak MJ, Santangelo K, Hahn J, Kaufman R, Carleton T, Hua XC, et al. Virtual reality surgical simulation for lower urinary tract endoscopy and procedures. J Endourol. 2002;16(3):185–90. PubMed PMID: 12028630. Epub 2002/05/25. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Sweet R, Kowalewski T, Oppenheimer P, Weghorst S, Satava R. Face, content and construct validity of the University of Washington virtual reality transurethral prostate resection trainer. J Urol. 2004;172(5 Pt 1):1953–7. PubMed PMID: 15540764. Epub 2004/11/16. eng.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Rashid HH, Kowalewski T, Oppenheimer P, Ooms A, Krieger JN, Sweet RM. The virtual reality transurethral prostatic resection trainer: evaluation of discriminate validity. J Urol. 2007;177(6):2283–6. PubMed PMID: 17509340. Epub 2007/05/19. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Mishra S, Kurien A, Ganpule A, Veeramani M, Sabnis RB, Desai M. Face and content validity of transurethral resection of prostate on Uro trainer: is the simulation training useful? J Endourol. 2010;24(11):1839–43. PubMed PMID: 20653419. Epub 2010/07/27. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Reich O, Noll M, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Waidelich R, Seitz M, et al. High-level virtual reality simulator for endourologic procedures of lower urinary tract. Urology. 2006;67(6):1144–8. PubMed PMID: 16765168. Epub 2006/06/13. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kallstrom R, Hjertberg H, Svanvik J. Impact of virtual reality-simulated training on urology residents’ performance of transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol. 2010;24(9):1521–8. PubMed PMID: 20677993. Epub 2010/08/04. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Mishra S, Kurien A, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Sabnis R, Desai M. Percutaneous renal access training: content validation comparison between a live porcine and a virtual reality (VR) simulation model. BJU Int. 2010;106(11):1753–6. PubMed PMID: 20950308. Epub 2010/10/19. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Knudsen BE, Matsumoto ED, Chew BH, Johnson B, Margulis V, Cadeddu JA, et al. A randomized, controlled, prospective study validating the acquisition of percutaneous renal collecting system access skills using a computer based hybrid virtual reality surgical simulator: phase I. J Urol. 2006;176(5):2173–8. PubMed PMID: 17070287. Epub 2006/10/31. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Seixas-Mikelus SA, Kesavadas T, Srimathveeravalli G, Chandrasekhar R, Wilding GE, Guru KA. Face validation of a novel robotic surgical simulator. Urology. 2010;76(2):357–60. PubMed PMID: 20299081. Epub 2010/03/20. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Seixas-Mikelus SA, Stegemann AP, Kesavadas T, Srimathveeravalli G, Sathyaseelan G, Chandrasekhar R, et al. Content validation of a novel robotic surgical simulator. BJU Int. 2011;107(7):1130–5. PubMed PMID: 21029316. Epub 2010/10/30. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Colaco M, Balica A, Su D, Barone J. Initial experiences with RoSS surgical simulator in residency training: a validity and model analysis. J Robot Surg. 2013;7(1):71–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Gavazzi A, Bahsoun AN, Van Haute W, Ahmed K, Elhage O, Jaye P, et al. Face, content and construct validity of a virtual reality simulator for robotic surgery (SEP Robot). Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93(2):152–6. PubMed PMID: 22041146. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3293312. Epub 2011/11/02. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Perrenot C, Perez M, Tran N, Jehl JP, Felblinger J, Bresler L, et al. The virtual reality simulator dV-trainer((R)) is a valid assessment tool for robotic surgical skills. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(9):2587–93. PubMed PMID: 22476836. Epub 2012/04/06. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Sethi AS, Peine WJ, Mohammadi Y, Sundaram CP. Validation of a novel virtual reality robotic simulator. J Endourol. 2009;23(3):503–8. PubMed PMID: 19265469. Epub 2009/03/07. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. 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(6):1288–92. PubMed PMID: 19362352. Epub 2009/04/14. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lerner MA, Ayalew M, Peine WJ, Sundaram CP. Does training on a virtual reality robotic simulator improve performance on the da Vinci surgical system? J Endourol. 2010;24(3):467–72. PubMed PMID: 20334558. Epub 2010/03/26. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Korets R, Mues AC, Graversen JA, Gupta M, Benson MC, Cooper KL, et al. Validating the use of the Mimic dV-trainer for robotic surgery skill acquisition among urology residents. Urology. 2011;78(6):1326–30. PubMed PMID: 22001096. Epub 2011/10/18. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Finnegan KT, Meraney AM, Staff I, Shichman SJ. da Vinci skills simulator construct validation study: correlation of prior robotic experience with overall score and time score simulator performance. Urology. 2012;80(2):330–5. PubMed PMID: 22704177. Epub 2012/06/19. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kelly DC, Margules AC, Kundavaram CR, Narins H, Gomella LG, Trabulsi EJ, et al. Face, content, and construct validation of the Da Vinci skills simulator. Urology. 2012;79(5):1068–72. PubMed PMID: 22546387. Epub 2012/05/02. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Hung AJ, Zehnder P, Patil MB, Cai J, Ng CK, Aron M, et al. Face, content and construct validity of a novel robotic surgery simulator. J Urol. 2011;186(3):1019–24. PubMed PMID: 21784469. Epub 2011/07/26. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Hung AJ, Jayaratna IS, Teruya K, Desai MM, Gill IS, Goh AC. Comparative assessment of three standardized robotic surgery training methods. BJU Int. 2013;112(6):864–71. PubMed PMID: 23470136. Epub 2013/03/09. Eng.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Liss MA, Abdelshehid C, Quach S, Lusch A, Graversen J, Landman J, et al. Validation, correlation, and comparison of the da Vinci trainer(™) and the da Vinci surgical skills simulator(™) using the mimic(™) software for urologic robotic surgical education. J Endourol. 2012;26(12):1629–34. PubMed PMID: 22845173. Epub 2012/08/01. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Hung AJ, Patil MB, Zehnder P, Cai J, Ng CK, Aron M, et al. Concurrent and predictive validation of a novel robotic surgery simulator: a prospective, randomized study. J Urol. 2012;187(2):630–7. PubMed PMID: 22177176. Epub 2011/12/20. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Vassiliou MC, Feldman LS, Andrew CG, Bergman S, Leffondre K, Stanbridge D, et al. A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg. 2005;190(1):107–13. PubMed PMID: 15972181. Epub 2005/06/24. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Kang SG, Yang KS, Ko YH, Kang SH, Park HS, Lee JG, et al. A study on the learning curve of the robotic virtual reality simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012;22(5):438–42. PubMed PMID: 22401588. Epub 2012/03/10. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Jonsson MN, Mahmood M, Askerud T, Hellborg H, Ramel S, Wiklund NP, et al. ProMIS can serve as a da Vinci(R) simulator – a construct validity study. J Endourol. 2011;25(2):345–50. PubMed PMID: 21114413. Epub 2010/12/01. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Brinkman WM, Luursema JM, Kengen B, Schout BM, Witjes JA, Bekkers RL. da Vinci skills simulator for assessing learning curve and criterion-based training of robotic basic skills. Urology. 2013;81(3):562–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KK, Tesfay ST, Scott DJ. Content and face validity of a comprehensive robotic skills training program for general surgery, urology, and gynecology. Am J Surg. 2012;203(4):535–9. PubMed PMID: 22326049. Epub 2012/02/14. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Arain NA, Dulan G, Hogg DC, Rege RV, Powers CE, Tesfay ST, et al. Comprehensive proficiency-based inanimate training for robotic surgery: reliability, feasibility, and educational benefit. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(10):2740–5. PubMed PMID: 22538678. Epub 2012/04/28. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Dulan G, Rege RV, Hogg DC, Gilberg-Fisher KM, Arain NA, Tesfay ST, et al. Developing a comprehensive, proficiency-based training program for robotic surgery. Surgery. 2012;152(3):477–88. PubMed PMID: 22938907. Epub 2012/09/04. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Smith R, Patel V, Satava R. Fundamentals of robotic surgery: outcomes measures and curriculum development. 2013. [cited 2013]. Available from: https://www.nicholsoncenter.com/sites/default/files/research/Fundamentals%20of%20Robotic%20Surgery%20Outcomes%20Measures%20and%20Curriculum%20Development.pdf.

  94. Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Huynh VB, Etafy M, McDougall EM. Validation study of a virtual reality robotic simulator – role as an assessment tool? J Urol. 2012;187(3):998–1002. PubMed PMID: 22264455. Epub 2012/01/24. eng.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Jenison EL, Gil KM, Lendvay TS, Guy MS. Robotic surgical skills: acquisition, maintenance, and degradation. JSLS. 2012;16(2):218–28. PubMed PMID: 23477169. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3481234. Epub 2013/03/13. eng.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Indiana University, 535 Barnhill Dr., Suite 420, Indianapolis, IN, 46202-5289, USA

    Jason Cheng-En Sea MD & Chandru P. Sundaram MD

Authors
  1. Jason Cheng-En Sea MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chandru P. Sundaram MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason Cheng-En Sea MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA

    Joseph C. Liao

  2. Department of Urology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida, USA

    Li-Ming Su

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sea, J.CE., Sundaram, C.P. (2015). Urologic Surgery Training Using Computer-Assisted Simulators. In: Liao, J., Su, LM. (eds) Advances in Image-Guided Urologic Surgery. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1450-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1450-0_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1449-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1450-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation