Hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy skills acquisition: augmented reality simulator versus human cadaver training models.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare a simulator with the human cadaver model for hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal skills acquisition training. DESIGN: An observational prospective comparative study was conducted to compare the laparoscopic surgery training models. SETTING: The study took place during the laparoscopic colectomy training course performed at the annual scientific meeting of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty four practicing surgeons performed hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy on human cadavers (n = 7) and on an augmented reality simulator (n = 27). Prior laparoscopic colorectal experience was assessed. Trainers and trainees completed independently objective structured assessment forms. Training models were compared by trainees' technical skills scores, events scores, and satisfaction. RESULTS: Prior laparoscopic experience was similar in both surgeon groups. Generic and specific skills scores were similar on both training models. Generic events scores were significantly better on the cadaver model. The 2 most frequent generic events occurring on the simulator were poor hand-eye coordination and inefficient use of retraction. Specific events were scored better on the simulator and reached the significance limit (p = 0.051) for trainers. The specific events occurring on the cadaver were intestinal perforation and left ureter identification difficulties. Overall satisfaction was better for the cadaver than for the simulator model (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: With regard to skills scores, the augmented reality simulator had adequate qualities for the hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy training. Nevertheless, events scores highlighted weaknesses of the anatomical replication on the simulator. Although improvements likely will be required to incorporate the simulator more routinely into the colorectal training, it may be useful in its current form for more junior trainees or those early on their learning curve.

Hand-assisted versus straight laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy on a training simulator: what is the difference? A stepwise comparison of hand-assisted versus straight laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy performance on an augmented reality simulator.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that simulator-generated metrics and intraoperative errors may be able to differentiate the technical differences between hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) and straight laparoscopic (SL) approaches. METHODS: Thirty-eight trainees performed two laparoscopic sigmoid colectomies on an augmented reality simulator, randomly starting by a SL (n = 19) or HAL (n = 19) approach. Both approaches were compared according to simulator-generated metrics, and intraoperative errors were collected by faculty. RESULTS: Sixty-four percent of surgeons were experienced (>50 procedures) with open colon surgery. Fifty-five percent and 69% of surgeons were inexperienced (<10 procedures) with SL and HAL colon surgery, respectively. Time (P < 0.001), path length (P < 0.001), and smoothness (P < 0.001) were lower with the HAL approach. Operative times for sigmoid and splenic flexure mobilization and for the colorectal anastomosis were significantly shorter with the HAL approach. Time to control the vascular pedicle was similar between both approaches. Error rates were similar between both approaches. Operative time, path length, and smoothness correlated directly with the error rate for the HAL approach. In contrast, error rate inversely correlated with the operative time for the SL approach. CONCLUSIONS: A HAL approach for sigmoid colectomy accelerated colonic mobilization and anastomosis. The difference in correlation between both laparoscopic approaches and error rates suggests the need for different skills to perform the HAL and the SL sigmoid colectomy. These findings may explain the preference of some surgeons for a HAL approach early in the learning of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

A comparison of human cadaver and augmented reality simulator models for straight laparoscopic colorectal skills acquisition training.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the human cadaver model with an augmented reality simulator for straight laparoscopic colorectal skills acquisition. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-five sigmoid colectomies were performed on a cadaver (n = 7) or an augmented reality simulator (n = 28) during a laparoscopic training course. Prior laparoscopic colorectal experience was assessed. Objective structured technical skills assessment forms were completed by trainers and trainees independently. Groups were compared according to technical skills and events scores and satisfaction with training model. RESULTS: Prior laparoscopic experience was similar in both groups. For trainers and trainees, technical skills scores were considerably better on the simulator than on the cadaver. For trainers, generic events score was also considerably better on the simulator than on the cadaver. The main generic event occurring on both models was errors in the use of retraction. The main specific event occurring on both models was bowel perforation. Global satisfaction was better for the cadaver than for the simulator model (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The human cadaver model was more difficult but better appreciated than the simulator for laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy training. Simulator training followed by cadaver training can appropriately integrate simulators into the learning curve and maintain the benefits of both training methodologies.