4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Robot assisted versus laparoscopic suturing learning curve in a simulated setting.

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Compared to conventional laparoscopy, robot assisted surgery is expected to have most potential in difficult areas and demanding technical skills like minimally invasive suturing. This study was performed to identify the differences in the learning curves of laparoscopic versus robot assisted suturing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An appraisal of the learning curve in robotic general surgery

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices.

            Surgical robotics has been promoted as an enabling technology. This study tests the hypothesis that use of the robotic surgical system can significantly improve technical ability by comparing the performance of both experts and novices on a complex laparoscopic task and a robotically assisted task. Laparoscopic experts (LE) with substantial laparoscopic and robotic experience (n = 9) and laparoscopic novices (LN) (n = 20) without any robotic experience performed sequentially 10 trials of a suturing task using either robotic or standard laparoscopic instrumentation fitted to the ProMIS surgical simulator. Objective performance metrics provided by ProMIS (total task time, instrument pathlength, and smoothness) and an assessment of learning curves were analyzed. Compared with LNs, the LEs demonstrated significantly better performance on all assessment measures. Within the LE group, there was no difference in smoothness (328 +/- 159 vs 355 +/- 174; P = .09) between robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic tasks. An improvement was noted in total task time (113 +/- 41 vs 132 +/- 55 sec; P < .05) and instrument pathlengths (371 +/- 163 vs 645 +/- 269 cm; P < .05) when using the robot. This advantage in terms of total task time, however, was lost among the LEs by the last 3 trials (114 +/- 40 vs 118 +/- 49 s; P = .84), while instrument pathlength remained better consistently throughout all the trials. For the LNs, performance was significantly better in the robotic trials on all 3 measures throughout all the trials. The ProMIS surgical simulator was able to distinguish between skill levels (expert versus novice) on robotic suturing tasks, suggesting that the ProMIS is a valid tool for measuring skill in robot-assisted surgery. For all the ProMIS metrics, novices demonstrated consistently better performance on a suturing task using robotics as compared to a standard laparoscopic setup. This effect was less evident for experts who demonstrated improvements only in their economy of movement (pathlength), but not in the speed or smoothness of performance. Robotics eliminated the early learning curve for novices, which was present when they used standard laparoscopic tools. Overall, this study suggests that, when performing complex tasks such as knot tying, surgical robotics is most useful for inexperienced laparoscopists who experience an early and persistent enabling effect. For experts, robotics is most useful for improving economy of motion, which may have implications for the highly complex procedures in limited workspaces (eg, prostatectomy). Copyright 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Augmented versus Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulation: What Is the Difference?

              Background Virtual reality (VR) is an emerging new modality for laparoscopic skills training; however, most simulators lack realistic haptic feedback. Augmented reality (AR) is a new laparoscopic simulation system offering a combination of physical objects and VR simulation. Laparoscopic instruments are used within an hybrid mannequin on tissue or objects while using video tracking. This study was designed to assess the difference in realism, haptic feedback, and didactic value between AR and VR laparoscopic simulation. Methods The ProMIS AR and LapSim VR simulators were used in this study. The participants performed a basic skills task and a suturing task on both simulators, after which they filled out a questionnaire about their demographics and their opinion of both simulators scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The participants were allotted to 3 groups depending on their experience: experts, intermediates and novices. Significant differences were calculated with the paired t-test. Results There was general consensus in all groups that the ProMIS AR laparoscopic simulator is more realistic than the LapSim VR laparoscopic simulator in both the basic skills task (mean 4.22 resp. 2.18, P < 0.000) as well as the suturing task (mean 4.15 resp. 1.85, P < 0.000). The ProMIS is regarded as having better haptic feedback (mean 3.92 resp. 1.92, P < 0.000) and as being more useful for training surgical residents (mean 4.51 resp. 2.94, P < 0.000). Conclusions In comparison with the VR simulator, the AR laparoscopic simulator was regarded by all participants as a better simulator for laparoscopic skills training on all tested features.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Surg Endosc
                Surgical endoscopy
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1432-2218
                0930-2794
                Aug 2020
                : 34
                : 8
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Pediatric Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre - Amalia Children's Hospital, Geert Grooteplein 10 Route 618, 6500HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Erik.leijte@radboudumc.nl.
                [2 ] Department of Pediatric Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre - Amalia Children's Hospital, Geert Grooteplein 10 Route 618, 6500HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
                [3 ] Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
                Article
                10.1007/s00464-019-07263-2
                10.1007/s00464-019-07263-2
                7326898
                31754849
                c0fc0f4b-9988-4ceb-8049-aef8273376ff
                History

                Learning curve,Simulation,Robotics training,Laparoscopy training

                Comments

                Comment on this article