Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational stepwise robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) procedure for urology residents.
Methods: We performed a detailed evaluation of 42 RARP procedures performed by a single urology resident from July 2019 to February 2022. The RARP procedures were divided into the following nine steps: (1) bladder dissection, (2) endopelvic fascia dissection, (3) bladder neck dissection, (4) seminal vesicle dissection, (5) Denonvilliers' fascia dissection, (6) dorsal vascular complex ligation, (7) dissection of the prostatic apex, (8) posterior anastomosis, and (9) urethro-vesical anastomosis. The procedures were further subcategorized as anatomical understanding, spatial recognition, and technical skills for evaluation of resident training. The surgeries were divided into first and second halves, and patient characteristics and operative outcomes were statistically analyzed. The operative time of each of the nine steps and the reasons for proctor intervention were compared.
Results: Among 42 patients, there were no significant differences in operative outcomes between the two groups. The median operative time was 169 min (164 vs. 179 min, p = .12), and the median console time was 128 min (127 vs. 130 min, p = .74). Although there were no significant differences in the time of the nine steps, the resident significantly overcame (7) dissection of the prostatic apex and (8) posterior anastomosis based on the evaluation of the proctored reasons for intervention.
Conclusions: Urology residents can safely perform and efficiently learn RARP with this stepwise educational system. This educational stepwise RARP procedure can effectively help residents to develop their skills.
(© 2024 Asia Endosurgery Task Force and Japan Society of Endoscopic Surgery and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)
References: Altok M, Achim MF, Matin SF, Pettaway CA, Chapin BF, Davis JW. A decade of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy training: time‐based metrics and qualitative grading for fellows and residents. Urol Oncol. 2018;36(13):e19‐e25.
Davis JW, Kamat A, Munsell M, Pettaway C, Pisters L, Matin S. Initial experience of teaching robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy to surgeons‐in‐training: can training be evaluated and standardized? BJU Int. 2010;105:1148‐1154.
Urology Robot‐Assisted Surgery Education Program: Japanese Urological Association and Japanese Society of Endourology and Robotics. April 1, 2020 modification. https://www.jsee.jp/davinci/program/.
Hamid A, Mohammed SK, Khurshid AG, et al. Learning curves for urological procedures: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2014;114(4):617‐629.
Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a followship‐trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol. 2007;21(4):441‐447.
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;68:75‐79.
Link BA, Nelson R, Josephson DY, Lau C, Wilson TG. Training of urologic oncology fellows does not adversely impact outcomes of robot‐assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2009;23:301‐305.
Rhee H, Paterdis J, Heathcote P. Robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using modular training programme in a private hospital. J Robot Surg. 2013;7:339‐344.
Lee Z, Lightfoot AJ, Mucksavage P, Lee DI. Can robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy be taught to chief residents and fellows without affecting operative outcomes? Prostate Int. 2015;3:47‐50.
Thornblade LW, Fong Y. Simulation‐based training in robotic surgery: contemporary and future methods. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2021;31(5):556‐560.
Thiel DD, Francis P, Heckman MG, Winfield HN. Prospective evaluation of factors affecting operating time in a residency/fellowship training program incorporating robot‐assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2008;22:1331‐1338.
Sridhar AN, Briggs TP, Kelly JD, Nathan S. Training in robotic surgery—an overview. Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18:58.
Yule S, Flin R, Paterson‐Brown S, Maran N. Non‐technical skills for surgeons in the operating room: a review of the literature. Surgery. 2006;139(2):140‐149.
Wood TC, Raison N, Haldar S, et al. Training tools for nontechnical skills for surgeons—a systematic review. J Surg Educ. 2017;74(4):548‐578.
Tholomier C, Couture F, Ajib K, et al. Oncological and functional outcomes of a large Canadian robotic‐assisted radical prostatectomy database with 10 years of surgical experience. Can J Urol. 2019;26(4):9843‐9851.
Processing Request
No Comments.