Laparoscopic urology training in South Africa

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Laparoscopic urologic surgery is not widely practiced in South Africa. After presenting a laparoscopic training course, we evaluated how effectively this training translated into clinical practice. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Invitations to the course were sent to all South African urologists. Ten applicants attended the course, which consisted of dry and in-vivo animal surgery. Two questionnaires were sent out after the course. Questionnaire 1 (at course completion) aimed at identifying the precourse laparoscopic experience and expectations of the trainee. Questionnaire 2 (6 months postcourse) assessed how much laparoscopic surgery the participant had performed since the course. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of all South African urologists responded to the invitation. Prior to the course, 40% of trainees had performed >or=10 laparoscopic cases, 30% had performed <10 cases, and 30% had never performed laparoscopy, whereas 60% expected to be doing one or two cases a month after completing the course. Six months after the course, 60% had performed no laparoscopic cases. Of the three trainees who had never before done laparoscopic procedures, none had started to perform procedures since the course. The commonest procedures performed were varicocelectomy and diagnostic laparoscopy for nonpalpable testis. CONCLUSIONS: A hands-on laparoscopic training course to introduce laparoscopic urology into South African private urology practice has not translated into a satisfactory number of clinical cases being performed. The causes are likely multifactorial but are greatly influenced by social and economic forces. One possible solution may be to offer a mentor-based training program.     

Face validation of the Simbionix LAP Mentor virtual reality training module and its applicability in the surgical curriculum

BACKGROUND: The goal of our study was to determine expert and referent face validity of the LAP Mentor, the first procedural virtual reality (VR) laparoscopy trainer. METHODS: In The Netherlands 49 surgeons and surgical trainees were given a hands-on introduction to the Simbionix LAP Mentor training module. Subsequently, a standardized five-point Likert-scale questionnaire was administered. Respondents who had performed over 50 laparoscopic procedures were classified as "experts." The others constituted the "referent" group, representing nonexperts such as surgical trainees. RESULTS: Of the experts, 90.5% (n = 21) judge themselves to be average or above-average laparoscopic surgeons, while 88.5% of referents (n = 28) feel themselves to be less-than-average laparoscopic surgeons (p = 0.000). There is agreement between both groups on all items concerning the simulator's performance and application. Respondents feel strongly about the necessity for training on basic skills before operating on patients and unanimously agree on the importance of procedural training. A large number (87.8%) of respondents expect the LAP Mentor to enhance a trainee's laparoscopic capability, 83.7% expect a shorter laparoscopic learning curve, and 67.3% even predict reduced complication rates in laparoscopic cholecystectomies among novice surgeons. The preferred stage for implementing the VR training module is during the surgeon's residency, and 59.2% of respondents feel the surgical curriculum is incomplete without VR training. CONCLUSION: Both potential surgical trainees and trainers stress the need for VR training in the surgical curriculum. Both groups believe the LAP Mentor to be a realistic VR module, with a powerful potential for training and monitoring basic laparoscopic skills as well as full laparoscopic procedures. Simulator training is perceived to be both informative and entertaining, and enthusiasm among future trainers and trainees is to be expected. Further validation of the system is required to determine whether the performance results agree with these favorable expectations.     

Laparoscopic practice patterns among North American urologists 5 years after formal training

PURPOSE: We assessed urologist laparoscopy practice patterns 5 years after a postgraduate training course in urological laparoscopic surgery. Results were compared to findings from similar studies performed on the same cohort at 3 and 12 months after training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1991 and November 1992, 11, 2-day university sponsored, postgraduate laparoscopic surgery training programs were held. A survey was mailed to the 322 North American participants in the summer of 1997 to determine current laparoscopic use and experience. RESULTS: Of the 166 respondents (51% response rate) 53.6% (89) had performed 1 or more laparoscopic procedures in the previous year, compared to 84% 1 year following course completion. Of the respondents 37% believed their laparoscopic experience was sufficient to maintain skills compared to 66% at 1 year. Of the respondents 6% had performed more laparoscopic procedures while 82% had performed fewer than anticipated. Reasons cited for decreased use included decreasing and/or lack of indications, increased cost, decreased patient interest, higher complication rates, decreased institutional support and increased operative time. Respondents practicing in academic or residency affiliated centers, or those who had completed residency after 1980 were more likely to have performed more procedures than anticipated (p = 0.044) compared to community based colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic use by urologists trained in the postgraduate setting is decreasing. Few respondents are maintaining the skills acquired during the original training course. Decreased use appears to be multifactorial.     

Minimally invasive pediatric surgery: Increasing implementation in daily practice and resident’s training

Background In 1998, the one-year experience in minimally invasive abdominal surgery in children at a pediatric training center was assessed. Seven years later, we determined the current status of pediatric minimally invasive surgery in daily practice and surgical training. Methods A retrospective review was undertaken of all children with intra-abdominal operations performed between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2005. Results The type of operations performed ranged from common interventions to demanding laparoscopic procedures. 81% of all abdominal procedures were performed laparoscopically, with a complication rate stable at 6.9%, and conversion rate decreasing from 10% to 7.4%, compared to 1998. There were six new advanced laparoscopic procedures performed in 2005 as compared to 1998. The children in the open operated group were significantly smaller and younger than in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). The majority (64.2%) of the laparoscopic procedures were performed by a trainee. There was no difference in the operating times of open versus laparoscopic surgery, or of procedures performed by trainees versus staff surgeons. Laparoscopy by trainees did not have a negative impact on complication or conversion rates. Conclusions Laparoscopy is an established approach in abdominal procedures in children, and does not hamper surgical training.     

Cadaveric versus porcine models in urological laparoscopic training

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopy performed on anesthetized pigs is an established training model. In this pilot study, we performed laparoscopy on cadavers as a training modality for urologists participating in a laparoscopic seminar. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared data from two consecutive laparoscopy seminars performed at our institution. The first included a laparoscopy session performed on pigs. The second was in the same setup, yet laparoscopy was performed on fresh cadavers. We analyzed and compared the trainees' perspectives regarding the 2 modalities using a 5-scale satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: Seven trainees attended the cadaveric and 9 the porcine laparoscopy session. The two groups were similar in terms of age and previous laparoscopic and urological experience. The general satisfaction of the two training modalities was high in the two groups, as well as their will for another session of the same kind. Yet the trainees ranked their understanding of the surgical anatomy, laparoscopic technique and use of instruments significantly higher in the cadaveric laparoscopy group (p values were 0.007, 0.006 and 0.032, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Cadaveric laparoscopy may offer an ideal surgical environment allowing dissection and performance of complete procedures. In this pilot study, we conducted the first reported cadaveric laparoscopy training seminar in urology. The trainees preferred the cadaveric laparoscopy and found it superior to porcine laparoscopy. We believe that cadaveric laparoscopy is an important training tool, which may be added to the armamentarium of urological laparoscopy training courses.     

Development of a valid, cost-effective laparoscopic training program

BACKGROUND: Practical programs for training and evaluating surgeons in laparoscopy are needed to keep pace with demand for minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: At the University of Kentucky five inexpensive simulations have been developed to train and assess surgical residents. Residents are videotaped performing laparoscopic procedures on models. Five surgeons assess the taped performances on 4 global skills. RESULTS: Creating mechanical models reduces training costs. Trainees agreed procedures were well represented by the simulations. Blinded assessment of performances showed high interrater agreement and correlated with the trainees' level of experience. Nonclinician evaluations on checklists correlated with evaluations by surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Inexpensive simulations of laparoscopic appendectomy, cholecystectomy, inguinal herniorrhaphy, bowel enterotomy, and splenectomy enable surgical residents to practice laparoscopic skills safely. Obtaining masked, objective, and independent evaluations of basic skills in laparoscopic surgery can assist in reliable assessment of surgical trainees. The simulations described can anchor an innovative educational program during residency for training and assessment.     

Development of urologic laparoscopy in Germany,Austria, and Switzerland: a survey among urologists

Purpose

Laparoscopy introduction has dramatically changed urology. Novel techniques, such as laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) and natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), might also have substantial influence. This 2012 survey evaluated present laparoscopy use, its appraisal among urologic surgeons, laparoscopy training, and use of new techniques. Results were compared to the previous surveys, demonstrating the 10-year development of laparoscopy.

Methods

A detailed questionnaire regarding demographic data, laparoscopy use, attitudes concerning laparoscopy, and novel techniques was send to 424 departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Procedures performed in 25 indications were quantitatively evaluated.

Results

The response rate was 63 % (269). Eighty-six percent of the respondents reported performing laparoscopy, compared to 54 % in 2002. Only 16 % expected economic advantages with laparoscopy, whereas 67 % expected shorter hospitalization. Seventy percent of responders anticipated comparable functional and oncological results between laparoscopic procedures and open surgery. Slow learning curves (81 %) and insufficient training facilities (32 %) were reported to impair laparoscopic surgery. On average, laparoscopic and non-laparoscopic surgical teams consisted of 2.5 and 3.5 members, respectively. LESS procedures were performed at 15 % of institutions. Twenty-two percent of respondents considered NOTES techniques valuable for future urology. Few indications (laparoscopic prostatectomies or nephrectomies) were performed frequently in specialized centers, and the rapidly increasing procedure numbers observed between 2002 and 2007 had dropped to a mild accretion. The results demonstrate broad acceptance of laparoscopy in German urologic surgery, depict the need for structured training facilities, and indicate limited impact of novel techniques (LESS and NOTES).

Conclusions

The survey demonstrates the 10-year development of urologic laparoscopy and the broad acceptance of laparoscopic techniques.     

Acquiring surgical skills: a comparative study of open versus laparoscopic surgery

OBJECTIVES: A preliminary study to evaluate the feasibility of a protocol for comparing the learning curves for open and laparoscopic surgical procedures. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Thirteen pre-clinical medical students with no previous surgical training were given intensive coaching in open and laparoscopic surgical techniques for 12 weeks. At the end of this period, their open and laparoscopic skills were assessed by three independent examiners. Individual and aggregate ability scores in various aspects of open and laparoscopic surgery and the time taken to perform the procedures were compared using Student's t-test. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the overall scores by the two different techniques ( p=0.057 ). However, differences between the two techniques were significant in certain criteria including tissue dissection (p=0.024), tidiness of gall bladder (p=0.034 ) and liver ( p=0.016 ) specimens and the time taken for the two techniques ( p < or = 0.001 ). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that when inexperienced subjects are given equal training in laparoscopy and open surgery, the overall skills acquired were similar by both methods when assessed after 6 weeks. However, on detailed analysis of the different components of surgery, the laparoscopic skills were deficient in finer dissection, identification of correct planes and two-dimensional perception when compared to open surgery and required more operative time. Our study group perceived that laparoscopy was more difficult to learn than open surgery even after the training. The study group also felt that the training in basic surgical skills during their undergraduate careers would make them more interested in studying surgery and choosing it as a career.     

COMPLICATIONS OF LAPAROSCOPIC PROCEDURES AFTER CONCENTRATED TRAINING IN UROLOGICAL LAPAROSCOPY

PURPOSE: To increase the safety and efficiency of laparoscopic surgery clinical training programs have been developed to increase the skill and efficiency of urological trainees. We evaluated the impact of dedicated laparoscopy training on the rate and type of complications after trainees entered clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from 13 centers where laparoscopy was performed by a single surgeon with at least 12 months of training in urological laparoscopy before clinical practice. Data included training experience, laparoscopic procedures performed after commencing clinical practice and associated complications. Procedures were classified as easy, moderate and difficult. RESULTS: During training each surgeon participated in a mean of 71 cases. In clinical practice a total of 738 laparoscopic cases were performed with the group reporting an overall complication rate of 11.9%. The rate was unchanged when the initial 20, 30 and 40 cases per surgeon were compared with all subsequent cases (12%, 11.9% and 12% versus 11.8 to 12%, respectively). The re-intervention rate was 1.1%. The complication rate increased with case difficulty. Overall and early complication rates attributable to laparoscopic technique in the initial 20, 30 and 40 cases were identical. The most common complications were neuropathy in 13 patients, urine leakage/urinoma in 9, transfusion in 7 and ileus in 5. CONCLUSIONS: The complication rate of surgeons who completed at least 12 months of laparoscopy training did not differ according to initial versus subsequent surgical experience. Intensive training seems to decrease the impact of the learning curve for laparoscopy.     

Gynecological laparoscopy in residency training program: Dutch perspectives

Background Implementation of laparoscopy into residency training is difficult. This study was conducted to assess the current state of implementation of laparoscopic surgery into gynecological residency program, to identify factors influencing laparoscopic skills training, and to find solutions toward better training and implementation. Methods In 2003 a questionnaire was sent to all 68 postgraduate year 5 and year 6 residents in obstetrics and gynecology in The Netherlands. The questionnaire addressed demographics, performance of laparoscopy, self-perceived competence, simulator training, and factors influencing laparoscopic training in residency. Results Of the 68 residents, 60 (88%) responded; 46 (37%) were men and 78 (63%) women. Men showed significant higher mean self-perceived competence in some laparoscopic procedures than women. Of the respondents, 20% had no advanced laparoscopic gynecologist present in their teaching hospital. Residents felt that simulator training is important in relation to their performance in the operating room. Of all gynecological teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, 55% did not have the opportunity of simulator training. Of the respondents who had the possibility of simulator training, 33% did not use the simulator voluntarily. Residents who trained on a simulator felt training was significantly more important (p = 0.02) than residents who never practiced on a simulator. Respondents’ laparoscopic skills were subjectively evaluated in the operating room (92%) or were evaluated based on the number of laparoscopic procedures performed as primary surgeon (49%). Of the respondents, 47% were satisfied with their current laparoscopic skills and 27% also felt prepared for the more advanced procedures. Not having been primary surgeon in nonacademic teaching hospitals and even more so in academic teaching hospitals (p < 0.05) was a limiting factor in acquiring laparoscopic skills. Conclusions Incorporation of basic laparoscopic procedures into residency training has been successful; however, advanced procedures are not. Simulator training is still in its infancy in The Netherlands, is not frequently used voluntarily, and should be mandatory during residency. Acquired laparoscopic skills on a simulator and in the operating room should be objectively assessed, and above all, training of trainers is imperative.     

Laparoscopic appendicectomy: a trainee's perspective.

Minimally invasive surgery is rapidly becoming an integral part of general surgery. Many general surgeons have been trained to undertake laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It has been recommended that laparoscopic appendicectomy should be the training operation for junior surgeons. The aim of our study was to assess whether laparoscopic appendicectomy training can safely be introduced to junior surgeons in a district general hospital. During the 11 month study period, 27 laparoscopic and 38 open appendicectomies were performed. The median anaesthetic time was 80 min for laparoscopic and 52.5 min for open appendicectomies. Laparoscopic appendicectomies cost, on average, 618 pounds and open appendicectomies 770 pounds per case. The complication rate between the two procedures was equal. We therefore showed that laparoscopic appendicectomy by junior surgeons is both safe and cost-effective. Although the registrar did most of the laparoscopic appendicectomies, with resultant less operating for the SHO, laparoscopic appendicectomy provided the SHO with training in diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic dissection. We conclude that basic laparoscopic training should be introduced early in surgical training, after which laparoscopic appendicectomy is a safe procedure for surgical trainees.     

Training current and future robotic surgeons simultaneously: initial experiences with safety and efficiency

Robotic surgery is experiencing a rapidly-increasing presence in the field of general surgery. The adoption of any new technology carries the challenge of training current and future surgeons in a safe and effective manner. We report our experience with the initiation of a robotic general surgery program at an academic institution while simultaneously incorporating surgical trainees. The initial procedure performed was robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC). Concurrent with the introduction of a robotic general surgical program, our institution implemented a progressive surgical trainee curriculum for all active residents and fellows. Immediately after being credentialed to perform RAC, attending surgeons began incorporating surgical trainees into robotic procedures. We retrospectively reviewed our first 50 RACs and compared them with our previous 50 standard laparoscopic cholecystectomies (SLC) to determine the impact of rapid integration of surgical trainees on developing technologies. Despite new technology and novice surgeons, there was no difference in mean operative time between the SLC and RAC groups (75.3 vs. 84.1 min, p = 0.077). Two patients in the robotic-assisted group required intraoperative conversion. Hospital length of stay was similar between groups, with the majority of patients leaving the same day. There were no postoperative complications in either group. A robotic general surgery program can be initiated while concurrently instructing surgical trainees on robotic surgery in a safe and efficient manner. We report our initial experience with the adoption of this rapidly advancing technology and describe our training model.     

The need for training opportunities in advanced laparoscopic surgery

Background: There is controversy regarding the amount of training necessary to safely perform advanced laparoscopic surgery. General surgical residency often provides only a low volume of advanced laparoscopic cases and there is growing interest in nonaccredited fellowships focused on laparoscopic surgery.Objective: To assess surgical residents' perception of the need for training in advanced laparoscopic surgery in addition to that provided in a standard general surgical residency. Methods: A 15-item questionnaire was mailed to 985 physicians who either were Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) candidate members or had attended a SAGES resident course in 1998 or 1999. For the purposes of the survey, laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy, laparoscopic splenectomy, and laparoscopic colectomy were chosen as advanced procedures. Results: Of the 85 responses obtained, 81% were from respondents who were at the postgraduate fourth-year (PG4) level or higher. Furthermore, 58% of the respondents had taken a course in advanced laparoscopic surgery outside their residency program. The respondents believed that to perform the procedures safely and with confidence on entering practice, they needed to do at least eight each of the selected laparoscopic procedures. As reported, 45% of the respondents had performed three or fewer laparoscopic hernias; 60% had performed three or fewer laparoscopic Nissen fundoplications; 81% had performed three or fewer laparoscopic colectomies; and 86% had performed three or fewer splenectomies. Only 32% of the residents expected to perform more than 10 laparoscopic Nissen fundoplications, only 10% expected to perform more than 10 colectomies, and only 4% expected to perform more than 10 splenectomies before completing their residency. Many respondents (65%) said they would pursue an additional year of advanced laparoscopic training if it were available. In programs unaffiliated with a fellowship in advanced laparoscopic surgery, 65% of the residents were concerned that such a fellowship would interfere with residency training in laparoscopic surgery. In comparison, only 24% of the residents in programs affiliated with a fellowship in advanced laparoscopic surgery believed that the fellowship interfered with their training, whereas 47% of the residents in programs affiliated with a fellowship in advanced laparoscopic surgery thought that the fellowship had no impact on their training. Conclusions: Residents clearly perceive a need for additional training in advanced laparoscopic surgery. Residents from programs without a laparoscopic fellowship are concerned about a negative impact on their experience from a laparoscopic fellow, but residents from programs with a laparoscopic fellowship are neutral about the impact of a fellow.     

Evaluation of endoscopic and laparoscopic training practices in surgical residency programs

BACKGROUND: The ability to adequately train surgical residents in flexible and rigid endoscopy has become a difficult challenge for program directors. The American Board of Surgery requires residents to be familiar in these procedures but the methods for training have not been well defined nor formally outlined. The goals of this study were to evaluate resident experience in flexible endoscopy and laparoscopy and to investigate the specific methods used by surgical programs for the training of residents. METHODS: A survey was created by the authors and the Resident Education Committee of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons and was mailed to all program directors in general surgery in the United States based on the data base of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS). RESULTS: Ninety-six of 283 surveys were returned (33.9%). The surgeon played a greater role in flexible endoscopic training in 1998 as compared to 1988 (p=0.002). When analyzed by type of institution, community programs showed a similar trend but this was not seen in academic programs. Formal endoscopy rotations existed in 60% of programs but flexible endoscopy (5.2%) and laparoscopy (10.4%) fellowships were uncommon. No significant differences in the number of advanced laparoscopic procedures performed were found between academic and community programs. The presence of a laparoscopic fellow did not significantly decrease the number of cases per resident. CONCLUSION: According to our survey, surgery departments have a greater impact on flexible endoscopic training in 1998 than in 1988. This is likely due to the creation of formal endoscopy rotations and the hiring of fellowship trained endoscopic instructors. In addition, community programs have been able to provide adequate experience in both basic and advanced laparoscopic techniques as compared to academic programs. As with flexible endoscopy, however, formal laparoscopic rotations may be necessary to allow more intensive experience for each resident.     

Development of laparoscopic surgery and training facilities in Europe: results of a survey of the European Society of Uro-Technology (ESUT)

OBJECTIVE: The European Society of Uro-Technology (ESUT) conducted a survey in order to assess the application of laparoscopy and the facilitation of training programs within Europe. METHODS: A total of 430 urologists and residents from European countries answered the ESUT survey during the XVIIIth Annual EAU Meeting in Madrid in 2003. The survey constituted of 11 questions of which nine with dual response (Y/N) options. Two questions, evaluating the importance of different training methods and different reasons not to be involved in laparoscopy, were assessed by means of a Likert type scale. RESULTS: Laparoscopy was performed in 71% of urological departments. The majority (85%) of departments where no laparoscopy was performed, intended to establish it in the future. Two thirds of respondents believed laparoscopy would replace open surgery in the next 5 to 10 years. The access to training facilities was insufficient for 44%. Different methods of training were considered to be of equal importance. Among the reasons for not being involved in laparoscopic surgery a high variability was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy is performed in the majority of urological departments in Europe. While there is a strong believe in the prominent role of laparoscopy in the mid-long future, access to training is still needed.     

The Impact of COVID-19 on Plastic Surgery Training in the United Kingdom,Canada and Australia—A Cross-Sectional Study

Background Surgical trainees worldwide have been thrust into a period of uncertainty, with respect to the implications COVID-19 pandemic will have on their roles, training, and future career prospects. It is currently unclear how plastic surgery trainees are being affected by COVID-19. This study examined the experience of plastic surgery trainees in Canada, the UK, and Australia to determine trainee roles during the early COVID-19 emergency response and how training changed during this time. Methods A cross-sectional survey-based study was designed for plastic surgery trainees in the UK, Canada and Australia. In total, 110 trainees responded to the survey. Statistical tests were conducted to determine differences in responses, based on year of training and country of residence. Results In total, 9.7% (10/103) of respondents reported being deployed to cover another service. There was a significant difference between redeployment based on country ( p = 0.001). Within the UK group, 28.9% of respondents were redeployed. For trainees not deployed, 95.5% (85/89) reported that there has been a reduction in operative volume. Ninety-seven (94.1%) respondents reported that there were ongoing teaching activities offered by their program. The majority of trainees (66.4%) were concerned about their training. There was a significant difference between overall concern and country ( p < 0.05). Conclusion In these unprecedented times, training programs in plastic surgery should be aware of the major impact that COVID-19 has had on trainees and will have on their training. The majority of plastic surgery trainees have experienced a reduction in surgical exposure but have maintained some form of regular teaching.     

Survey of urological laparoscopic practices in the state of California

PURPOSE: In the interest of maintaining our surgical domain we performed a survey aimed at establishing laparoscopic practice patterns as they pertain to urological disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surveys were mailed to 2,902 surgeons in California who were listed with the American College of Surgeons, including 2,175 general surgeons, 510 urologists and 217 obstetricians-gynecologists. RESULTS: A total of 442 complete responses (15.2%) were tallied. Of urologists and of nonurologists 54% and 11% performed no laparoscopy, while 12% and 80%, respectively, devoted at least 5% of their time to laparoscopic surgery. Urologists and nonurologists performing no laparoscopy were older than those performing a significant volume (p < 0.05). Of urologists 16% thought that they were trained adequately during residency to perform laparoscopic surgery compared with 30% of nonurologists. Of the urologists who performed hand assisted laparoscopy, 50% tended to use it as a means of gaining familiarity with these techniques. These urologists performed more laparoscopic surgery than other urologists. While 80% of laparoscopy cases were community based, academic urologists are actively interested in laparoscopic surgery. The 2 most important reasons cited for performing laparoscopy were more rapid recovery and decreased morbidity. The leading laparoscopic procedures according to incidence for urologists performing laparoscopic surgery were diagnostic procedures (12.9%), varicocelectomy (12.1%), adrenalectomy (9.7%), pelvic lymphadenectomy (8.9%), and simple nephrectomy and renal cyst decortication (8.1% each). The leading laparoscopic cases according to the number of available cases per urologist were colposuspension-bladder neck suspension (1.06), donor nephrectomy (0.77), pelvic lymphadenectomy (0.52), varicocelectomy (0.48) and orchiopexy (0.45). Urologists performed more urological laparoscopy cases than nonurologists. CONCLUSIONS: Urological laparoscopic practice in California remains in its infancy. It is imperative that exposure should be increased in residency training programs.     

THE CASE FOR LAPAROSCOPIC ADRENALECTOMY

PURPOSE: The current status of laparoscopic adrenal surgery was assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A current MEDLINE search revealed 308 articles pertaining to laparoscopic surgery of the adrenal gland. Based on this literature review laparoscopic surgical anatomy, current indications and contraindications, and laparoscopic techniques were identified. The role of laparoscopic surgery for various adrenal disorders, including aldosteroma, pheochromocytoma, Cushing's syndrome, incidentaloma and adrenal cancer, were evaluated. Studies specifically comparing open versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy and the financial implications of laparoscopy were evaluated. Furthermore, newer advances in the minimally invasive management of surgical adrenal disease were identified. RESULTS: Available data from multiple institutions imply that laparoscopic adrenal surgery is safe and efficacious for aldosteroma, pheochromocytoma, Cushing's disease and incidentaloma. Compared to open surgery laparoscopy provides equally effective treatment, while minimizing patient morbidity. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is financially superior to open adrenalectomy. For adrenal cancer open surgery currently remains the treatment of choice. CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of patients with surgical adrenal disease except those with adrenal cancer laparoscopy may now be considered an established treatment modality.     

How far will simulators be involved into training?

The expansion of laparoscopy and endoscopic surgery has promoted a change in surgical skills acquisition. This review aims to identify problems that modulate surgical skills acquisition and the role of simulation in the current training programs. Social, medical, and working time constraints, together with patient safety issues, lead to a decreased availability of operating room (OR) training opportunities. Systematic reviews show that there is a positive “model to model” transfer of skills more evident for virtual reality (VR) simulation, although transfer from video tower exists for naïve trainees, both of which supplement standard laparoscopic training. VR to OR positive transfer is proven for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, although not for all parameters analyzed. A mixed model integrating both types of trainers into surgical curricula may strengthen their respective possibilities. To what extent simulation will be included in the surgical training programs depends on development of objective and finer assessment tools and proficiency-based criteria.     

Building a laparoscopic surgical skills training laboratory: resources and support.

BACKGROUND: Technical skills have historically been developed and assessed in the operating room. Multiple pressures including resident work hour limitations, increasing costs of operating room time, and patient safety concerns have led to an increased interest in conducting these activities in a safe, reproducible environment. To address some of these issues, many residency programs have developed laparoscopic surgical skills training laboratories. We sought to determine the current status of laparoscopic skills laboratories across residency programs. METHODS: In December 2004, surveys were mailed to all 251 United States general surgery residency program directors. This brief 2-page survey consists of 9 questions regarding laparoscopic skills training laboratories. RESULTS: Of the 251 mailed surveys, 111 completed surveys were returned (44%). Of the respondents, 81 have laparoscopic skills training laboratories in place (80%). Skills laboratories that used a defined curriculum, and general surgery programs that shared their laboratories with other training programs were determined to have significantly more resources. A wide variety of funding sources have been used to develop and support these skills laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variability in training practices and equipment currently used exists between laboratories. A more efficient, standardized approach to skills training across residency programs is a desirable goal for the immediate future.