Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical Simulation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ureteroscopy

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

  • 1483 Accesses

Abstract

Due to multiple factors, the approach to resident endourologic training has recently changed. Resident-patient contact has decreased secondary to restricted work hours, financial constraints of teaching institutions, and medicolegal concerns. Additionally, there is an increased breadth of knowledge and surgical skill required for Urology trainees, with the ongoing development of new minimally invasive techniques. The use of bench models, animal and cadaveric models, and virtual reality (VR) simulators has been proposed to bridge the existing training gap. Multiple studies have shown that ureteroscopic simulation is a valid method for teaching a basic skill set to residents, with improvement of skills throughout the completion of a designated curriculum. No widely accepted training module for ureteroscopic simulation has yet been established, although many authors propose a curriculum which incorporates the use of validated simulators in repetitive training activities, under the guidance of experts in the field. This chapter serves to further explain the increasing need for ureteroscopic simulation, to describe the validation of various simulators, to review simulators that are currently available, and to discuss the implementation of a ureteroscopic simulation curriculum.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
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. Jacomides L, Ogan K, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Use of a virtual reality simulator for ureteroscopy training. J Urol. 2004;171(1):320–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wallack MK, Chao L. Resident work hours: the ­evolution of a revolution. Arch Surg. 2001;136(12):1426–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Matsumoto ED, Hamstra SJ, Radomski SB, Cusimano MD. The effect of bench model fidelity on endourological skills: a randomized controlled study. J Urol. 2002;167(3):1243–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bridges M, Diamond DL. The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg. 1999;177(1):28–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wignall GR, Denstedt JD, Preminger GM, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS, Sweet RM, McDougall EM. Surgical simulation: a urological perspective. J Urol. 2008;179(5):1690–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gettman MT, Le CQ, Rangel LJ, Slezak JM, Bergstralh EJ, Krambeck AE. Analysis of a computer based simulator as an educational tool for cystoscopy: subjective and objective results. J Urol. 2008;179(1):267–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Watterson JD, Denstedt JD. Ureteroscopy and cystoscopy simulation in urology. J Endourol. 2007;21(3):263–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fairhurst K, Strickland A, Maddern GJ. Simulation speak. J Surg Educ. 2011;68(5):382–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sutton E and Park A. Minimally invasive surgery training: theories, methods, outcomes [Internet]. Washington: Department of Health & Human Services (US), National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine; 2010. Chapter 7, Simulation’s Role in Surgical Training. Available from: http://mastri.umm.edu/NIH-Book/index.html

  11. Hammond L, Ketchum J, Schwartz BF. Accreditation council on graduate medical education technical skills competency compliance: urologic surgical skills. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201(3):454–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Listing of ACS Accredited Education Institutes [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 Dec 2]; Available at: www.facs.org/education/accreditationprogram/list.html

  13. Sweet RM, McDougall EM. Simulation and computer-animated devices: the new minimally invasive skills training paradigm. Urol Clin North Am. 2008;35(3):519–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schout BM, Hendrikx AJ, Scheele F, Bemelmans BL, Scherpbier AJ. Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(3):536–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. McDougall EM. Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol. 2007;21(3):244–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Brehmer M, Swartz R. Training on bench models improves dexterity in ureteroscopy. Eur Urol. 2005;48(3):458–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carter FJ, Schijven MP, Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Francis NK, Hanna GB, Jakimowicz JJ. Consensus guidelines for validation of virtual reality surgical simulators. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(12):1523–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Olweny EO, Pearle MS. Update on resident training models for ureteroscopy. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12(2):115–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chou DS, Abdelshehid C, Clayman RV, McDougall EM. Comparison of results of virtual-reality simulator and training model for basic ureteroscopy training. J Endourol. 2006;20(4):266–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilhelm DM, Ogan K, Roehrborn CG, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Assessment of basic endoscopic performance using a virtual reality simulator. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;195(5):675–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shah J, Mackay S, Vale J, Darzi A. Simulation in urology–a role for virtual reality? BJU Int. 2001;88(7):661–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. 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  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Schout BM, Hendrikx AJ, Scherpbier AJ, Bemelmans BL. Update on training models in endourology: a qualitative systematic review of the literature between January 1980 and April 2008. Eur Urol. 2008;54(6):1247–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. White MA, Dehaan AP, Stephens DD, Maes AA, Maatman TJ. Validation of a high fidelity adult ureteroscopy and renoscopy simulator. J Urol. 2010;183(2):673–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brehmer M, Tolley D. Validation of a bench model for endoscopic surgery in the upper urinary tract. Eur Urol. 2002;42(2):175–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Michel MS, Knoll T, Köhrmann 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Matsumoto ED, Pace KT, D’A Honey RJ. Virtual reality ureteroscopy simulator as a valid tool for assessing endourological skills. Int J Urol. 2006;13(7):896–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Watterson JD, Beiko DT, Kuan JK, Denstedt JD. Randomized prospective blinded study validating acquistion of ureteroscopy skills using computer based virtual reality endourological simulator. J Urol. 2002;168(5):1928–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ogan K, Jacomides L, Shulman MJ, Roehrborn CG, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Virtual ureteroscopy predicts ureteroscopic proficiency of medical students on a cadaver. J Urol. 2004;172(2):667–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shah J, Montgomery B, Langley S, Darzi A. Validation of a flexible cystoscopy course. BJU Int. 2002;90(9):833–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Sampaio FJ, Pereira-Sampaio MA, Favorito LA. The pig kidney as an endourologic model: anatomic contribution. J Endourol. 1998;12(1):45–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Paterson RF, Lingeman JE, Evan AP, Connors BA, Williams Jr JC, McAteer JA. Percutaneous stone implantation in the pig kidney: a new animal model for lithotripsy research. J Endourol. 2002;16(8):543–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Evan AP, Connors BA, Lingeman JE, Blomgren P, Willis LR. Branching patterns of the renal artery of the pig. Anat Rec. 1996;246(2):217–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Cervantes L, Keitzer WA. Endoscopic training in urology. J Urol. 1960;84:585–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Trindade JC, Lautenschlager MF, de Araujo CG. Endoscopic surgery: a new teaching method. J Urol. 1981;126(2):192.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Habib HN, Berger J, Winter CC. Teaching transurethral surgery using a cow’s udder. J Urol. 1965;93:77–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Narwani KP, Reid EC. Teaching transurethral prostatic resection using cadaver bladder. J Urol. 1969;101(1):101.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ahmed K, Amer T, Challacombe B, Jaye P, Dasgupta P, Khan MS. How to develop a simulation programme in urology. BJU Int. 2011;108(11):1698–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Grantcharov TP, Reznick RK. Teaching procedural skills. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1129–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Aggarwal R, Grantcharov TP, Eriksen JR, Blirup D, Kristiansen VB, Funch-Jensen P, Darzi A. An evidence-based virtual reality training program for novice laparoscopic surgeons. Ann Surg. 2006;244(2):310–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Moorthy K, Hance J, Darzi A. A competency-based virtual reality training curriculum for the acquisition of laparoscopic psychomotor skill. Am J Surg. 2006;191(1):128–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Amy E. Krambeck M.D., Matthew T. Gettman M.D. & Mitra R. de Cógáin M.D.

Authors
  1. Amy E. Krambeck M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew T. Gettman M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mitra R. de Cógáin M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy E. Krambeck M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Glickman Urological & Kidney Institute, Department of Urology, The Cleveland Clinic, 2842 Fontenay Road, Cleveland, 44120, Ohio, USA

    Manoj Monga

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Krambeck, A.E., Gettman, M.T., de Cógáin, M.R. (2013). Surgical Simulation. In: Monga, M. (eds) Ureteroscopy. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-206-3_39

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-206-3_39

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-62703-205-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-62703-206-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation