Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundWhen introducing new equipment like robotic surgical systems, it is essential to ensure that surgeons have the basic skills before operating on patients. The objective was to investigate the validity evidence for a competency-based test for basic robotic surgical skills using the Versius® trainer.MethodsWe recruited medical students, residents, and surgeons which were classified based on data on clinical experience with the Versius system as either novices (0 min), intermediates (1–1000 min), or experienced (> 1000 min). All participants completed three rounds of eight basic exercises on the Versius trainer, where the first was used for familiarization and the final two for data analysis. The simulator automatically recorded data. Validity evidence was summarized using Messick’s framework, and the contrasting groups’ standard-setting method was used to define pass/fail levels.Results40 participants completed the three rounds of exercises. The discriminatory abilities of all parameters were tested, and five exercises including relevant parameters were selected to be part of the final test. 26 of 30 parameters could differentiate between novices and experienced surgeons but none of the parameters could discriminate between the intermediate and experienced surgeons. Test–retest reliability analysis using Pearson’s r or Spearman’s rho showed only 13 of 30 parameters had moderate or higher reliability. Non-compensatory pass/fail levels were defined for each exercise and showed that all novices failed all the exercises and that most experienced surgeons either passed or nearly passed all five exercises.ConclusionWe identified relevant parameters for five exercises that could be used to assess basic robotic skills for the Versius robotic system and defined a credible pass/fail level. This is the first step in developing a proficiency-based training program for the Versius system.

Telesurgery, a cutting-edge field at the intersection of medicine and technology, holds immense promise for enhancing surgical capabilities, extending medical care, and improving patient outcomes. In this scenario, this article explores the landscape of technical and ethical considerations that highlight the advancement and adoption of telesurgery. Network considerations are crucial for ensuring seamless and low-latency communication between remote surgeons and robotic systems, while technical challenges encompass system reliability, latency reduction, and the integration of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and 5G networks. Therefore, this article also explores the critical role of network infrastructure, highlighting the necessity for low-latency, high-bandwidth, secure and private connections to ensure patient safety and surgical precision. Moreover, ethical considerations in telesurgery include patient consent, data security, and the potential for remote surgical interventions to distance surgeons from their patients. Legal and regulatory frameworks require refinement to accommodate the unique aspects of telesurgery, including liability, licensure, and reimbursement. Our article presents a comprehensive analysis of the current state of telesurgery technology and its potential while critically examining the challenges that must be navigated for its widespread adoption.

IntroductionRobot-assisted surgery is becoming increasingly adopted by multiple surgical specialties. There is evidence of inherent risks of utilising new technologies that are unfamiliar early in the learning curve. The development of standardised and validated training programmes is crucial to deliver safe introduction. In this review, we aim to evaluate the current evidence and opportunities to integrate novel technologies into modern digitalised robotic training curricula.MethodsA systematic literature review of the current evidence for novel technologies in surgical training was conducted online and relevant publications and information were identified. Evaluation was made on how these technologies could further enable digitalisation of training.ResultsOverall, the quality of available studies was found to be low with current available evidence consisting largely of expert opinion, consensus statements and small qualitative studies. The review identified that there are several novel technologies already being utilised in robotic surgery training. There is also a trend towards standardised validated robotic training curricula. Currently, the majority of the validated curricula do not incorporate novel technologies and training is delivered with more traditional methods that includes centralisation of training services with wet laboratories that have access to cadavers and dedicated training robots.ConclusionsImprovements to training standards and understanding performance data have good potential to significantly lower complications in patients. Digitalisation automates data collection and brings data together for analysis. Machine learning has potential to develop automated performance feedback for trainees. Digitalised training aims to build on the current gold standards and to further improve the ‘continuum of training’ by integrating PBP training, 3D-printed models, telementoring, telemetry and machine learning.

Background The introduction of robotic technology has revolutionized radical prostatectomy surgery. However, the potential benefits of robotic techniques may have trade-offs in increased mental demand for the surgeon and the physical demand for the assisting surgeon. This study employed an innovative motion tracking tool along with validated workload questionnaire to assess the ergonomics and workload for both assisting and console surgeons intraoperatively. Methods Fifteen RARP cases were collected in this study. Cases were performed by 10 different participants, six primarily performed console tasks and four primarily performed assisting tasks. Participants had a median 12 (min—3, max—25) years of surgical experience. Both console and assisting surgeons performed robotic prostatectomy cases while wearing inertial measurement units (IMUs) that continuously track neck, shoulder, and torso motion without interfering with the sterile environment. Postoperatively, participants completed a workload questionnaire (SURG-TLX) and a body part discomfort questionnaire. Results Twenty-six questionnaires were completed from 13 assisting and 13 console surgeons over the 15 cases. Postoperative pain was reported highest for the right shoulder and neck. Mental demands were 41 % higher for surgeons at the console than assisting ( p  < 0.05), while physical demands were not significantly different. Assisting surgeons worked in demanding neck postures for 58 % of the procedure compared to 24 % for the console surgeon ( p  < 0.01). Surgeons at the console were primarily static and showed 2–5 times fewer movements than assisting surgeons ( p  < 0.01). Conclusions Postures were more ergonomic during console tasks than when assisting by the bedside; however, the console may constrain postures leading to static loads that have been associated with musculoskeletal symptoms for the neck, torso, and shoulders. The IMU sensors were effective at quantifying ergonomics in robotic prostatectomies, and these methods and findings have broad applications to other robotic procedures.

To investigate the reliability with which healthcare professionals with different levels of expertise are able to impart the exact location of prostate cancer (PCA) after (A) reading written magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports, (B) attending MRI presentations in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDT), and (C) examining 3D printed prostate models, which represents a new technology to describe the location of PCA lesions. We used three different PCA cases to assess the three information tools. Construct validation was performed using two healthcare groups with different levels of expertise: (1) Nine expert urologists in PCA, and (2) nine medical students. After each information tool, the study participants plotted the tumor location in a 2-dimensional prostate diagram. A scoring system was established to evaluate the drawings in terms of accuracy of plotting tumor position. Data are shown as median scores with interquartile range. Within the expert group, no significant difference was seen in the overall scoring results between the information tools (p = 0.34). Medical students performed significantly worse with MDT information (p = 0.03). Experts performed better in all three information tools compared to students, resulting in a significantly 25% higher overall total score (25.0[22.3-26.7] vs. 20.0[15.0-24.0], p<0.001). The difference was largest after MDT information, with experts showing a 49% better scoring (p<0.001), and second largest with the 3D printed models, showing a 17% better scoring of the experts (p = 0.07). No difference was found in the written MRI report scoring results between experts and students. 3D printed models provided better orientation guide to medical students compared to MDT MRI presentations. This indicates that the 3D printed models might be easier to understand than the current gold standard MDT conferences. Therefore, 3D models may play an increasingly important role in providing guidance for orientation for less experienced individuals, such as surgical trainees.

Objective To compare VR simulations with other training methods regarding improvements in objective assessment scores and task completion times. Method A database search was conducted on 20 May 2024 across Central, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. Included were randomised controlled trials comparing VR simulations to other training methods, assessing objective scores and task times. The Risk of Bias-2 tool was used for bias assessment. Results Eighteen studies were included. VR significantly improved objective scores ( n  = 339, SMD 1.04, 95% CI 0.40–1.69, P  = 0.002) and reduced task completion times ( n  = 357, SMD of –1.08, 95% CI of as – 2.05 to – 0.12, P  = 0.03) compared to no additional training. VR was as effective as dry lab training for improving scores ( n  = 213, SMD -0.47, 95% CI – 1.34 to 0.41, P  = 0.30) and task times ( n  = 98, SMD – 0.37, 95% CI – 1.51 to 0.78, P  = 0.53). However, one study found wet lab training significantly reduced task times compared to VR ( n  = 20, SMD of 1.7, 95% CI of 0.65–2.76, P  = 0.002). No significant differences were found when VR alone was compared to VR with expert advice. Conclusion VR is more effective than no additional training and is as effective as dry lab training in robotic skill acquisitions. Therefore, VR is effective in enhancing robotic surgery skills and warrants an expanded role in surgical training programmes.

PurposeEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented across a variety of disciplines to improve outcomes. Herein we describe the impact of ERAS on quality of life (QOL) and cost for patients undergoing urologic oncology surgery.MethodsA systematic literature search using the MEDLINE, Scopus, Clinictrials.gov, and Cochrane Review databases for studies published between 1946 and 2020 was conducted. Articles were reviewed and assigned a risk of bias by two authors and were included if they addressed ERAS and either QOL or cost-effectiveness for patients undergoing urologic oncology surgery.ResultsThe literature search yielded a total of 682 studies after removing duplicates, of which 10 (1.5%) were included in the review. Nine articles addressed radical cystectomy, while one addressed ERAS and QOL for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Six publications assessed the impact of ERAS on QOL domains. Questionnaires used for assessment of QOL varied across studies, and timing of administration was heterogeneous. Overall, ERAS improved patient QOL during early phases of recovery within the realms of bowel function, physical/social/cognitive functioning, sleep and pain control. Costs were assessed in 4 retrospective studies including 3 conducted in the United States and one from China all addressing radical cystectomy. Studies demonstrated either decreased costs associated with ERAS as a result of decreased length of stay or no change in cost based on ERAS implementation.ConclusionWhile limited studies are published on the subject, ERAS implementation for radical cystectomy and laparoscopic nephrectomy improved patient-reported QOL during early phases of recovery. For radical cystectomy, there was a decreased or neutral overall financial cost associated with ERAS. Further studies assessing QOL and cost-effectiveness over the entire global period of care in a variety of urologic oncology surgeries are warranted.

PurposeSurgical workflow analysis seeks to systematically break down operations into hierarchal components. It facilitates education, training, and understanding of surgical variations. There are known educational demands and variations in surgical practice in endoscopic transsphenoidal approaches to pituitary adenomas. Through an iterative consensus process, we generated a surgical workflow reflective of contemporary surgical practice.MethodsA mixed-methods consensus process composed of a literature review and iterative Delphi surveys was carried out within the Pituitary Society. Each round of the survey was repeated until data saturation and > 90% consensus was reached.ResultsThere was a 100% response rate and no attrition across both Delphi rounds. Eighteen international expert panel members participated. An extensive workflow of 4 phases (nasal, sphenoid, sellar and closure) and 40 steps, with associated technical errors and adverse events, were agreed upon by 100% of panel members across rounds. Both core and case-specific or surgeon-specific variations in operative steps were captured.ConclusionsThrough an international expert panel consensus, a workflow for the performance of endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection has been generated. This workflow captures a wide range of contemporary operative practice. The agreed “core” steps will serve as a foundation for education, training, assessment and technological development (e.g. models and simulators). The “optional” steps highlight areas of heterogeneity of practice that will benefit from further research (e.g. methods of skull base repair). Further adjustments could be made to increase applicability around the world.

Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) continues to grow globally. Despite this, in the UK and Ireland, it is estimated that over 70% of surgical trainees across all specialities have no access to robot-assisted surgical training (RAST). This study aimed to provide educational stakeholders guidance on a pre-procedural core robotic surgery curriculum (PPCRC) from the perspective of the end user; the surgical trainee. The study was conducted in four Phases: P1: a steering group was formed to review current literature and summarise the evidence, P2: Pan-Specialty Trainee Panel Virtual Classroom Discussion, P3: Accelerated Delphi Process and P4: Formulation of Recommendations. Forty-three surgeons in training representing all surgical specialties and training levels contributed to the three round Delphi process. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from previous rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as ≥ 80% agreement. There was 100% response from all three rounds. The resulting formulated guidance showed good internal consistency, with a Cronbach alpha of > 0.8. There was 97.7% agreement that a standardised PPCRC would be advantageous to training and that, independent of speciality, there should be a common approach (95.5% agreement). Consensus was reached in multiple areas: 1. Experience and Exposure, 2. Access and context, 3. Curriculum Components, 4 Target Groups and Delivery, 5. Objective Metrics, Benchmarking and Assessment. Using the Delphi methodology, we achieved multispecialty consensus among trainees to develop and reach content validation for the requirements and components of a PPCRC. This guidance will benefit from further validation following implementation.

BackgroundRobotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) procedures are performed worldwide and establishing processes for safe adoption of this technology is essential for patient benefit. We report results of the Delphi process to define and optimize robotic training procedures for HPB surgeons.MethodsIn 2019, a robotic HPB surgery panel with an interest in surgical training from the Americas and Europe was created and met. An e-consensus–finding exercise using the Delphi process was applied and consensus was defined as 80% agreement on each question. Iterations of anonymous voting continued over three rounds.ResultsMembers agreed on several points: there was need for a standardized robotic training curriculum for HPB surgery that considers experience of surgeons and based on a robotic hepatectomy includes a common approach for “basic robotic skills” training (e-learning module, including hardware description, patient selection, port placement, docking, troubleshooting, fundamentals of robotic surgery, team training and efficiency, and emergencies) and an “advanced technical skills curriculum” (e-learning, including patient selection information, cognitive skills, and recommended operative equipment lists). A modular approach to index procedures should be used with video demonstrations, port placement for index procedure, troubleshooting, and emergency scenario management information. Inexperienced surgeons should undergo training in basic robotic skills and console proficiency, transitioning to full procedure training of e-learning (video demonstration, simulation training, case observation, and final evaluation). Experienced surgeons should undergo basic training when using a new system (e-learning, dry lab, and operating room (OR) team training, virtual reality modules, and wet lab; case observations were unnecessary for basic training) and should complete the advanced index procedural robotic curriculum with assessment by wet lab, case observation, and OR team training.ConclusionsOptimization and standardization of training and education of HPB surgeons in robotic procedures was agreed upon. Results are being incorporated into future curriculum for education in robotic surgery.