Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of colorectal surgery. Minimally invasive surgery notably reduces the incidence of SSI. This study aimed to compare the incidences of SSI after robot-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) vs that after laparoscopic assisted colorectal surgery (LACS) and to analyze associated risk factors for SSI in minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

To compare the incidences of SSI after RACS and LACS, and to analyze the risk factors associated with SSI after minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Clinical data derived from patients who underwent minimally invasive colorectal surgery between October 2020 and October 2022 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University were collated. Differences in clinical characteristics and surgeryrelated information associated with RACS and LACS were compared, and possible risk factors for SSI were identified.

A total of 246 patients (112 LACS and 134 RACS) were included in the study. Fortythree (17.5%) developed SSI. The proportions of patients who developed SSI were similar in the two groups (17.9% vs 17.2%, P = 0.887). Diabetes mellitus, intraoperative blood loss ≥ 100 mL, and incision length were independent risk factors for SSI. Possible additional risk factors included neoadjuvant therapy, lesion site, and operation time.

There was no difference in SSI incidence in the RACS and LACS groups. Diabetes mellitus, intraoperative blood loss ≥ 100 mL, and incision length were independent risk factors for postoperative SSI.

Management of a trauma patient is a challenging process. Swift and accurate clinical assessment is required and time-sensitive decisions and life-saving procedures must be performed in an unstable patient. This requires a coordinated response by both the emergency room (ER) and operating room (OR) teams. However, a team of experts does not necessarily make an expert team. Root cause analysis of adverse events in surgery has shown that failures in coordination, planning, task management and particularly communication are the main causes for medical errors. While most research is focused on the ER trauma team, the trauma OR team also deserves attention. In fact, OR team dynamics may resemble more the ER team than the elective OR team. ER and OR trauma teams assemble on short notice, and their members, who are from different specialties and backgrounds, may not train regularly together or even know each other beforehand. And yet, they have to perform high-risk procedures and make high stake decisions, in a time-sensitive manner. The airline industry has long recognized the role of team training and non-technical skills (NTS) in reducing hazards. The implementation of the so called crew resource management or crisis resource management (CRM) has significantly made airline travel safer and the transposition to the medical context, with specific training in non-technical skills, has also brought great benefits. In fact, it is clear that adoption of non-technical skills (NTS) in healthcare has led to an increase in patient safety. In this narrative review we recapitulate some of the key non-technical skills and their relevance in trauma, with a focus on both the emergency department (ER) and the operating room (OR) teams, as well as on the transition of care from one to the other. Also, we explore the use of debriefing the team, as well as the roles of NTS training in both undergraduate and postgraduate settings. We review some of the existing trauma training courses and their roles in developing NTS. Finally, we briefly address the challenges posed by the development of trauma hybrid operating rooms.

Immersive technologies have thrived on a strong foundation of software and hardware, injecting vitality into medical training. This surge has witnessed numerous endeavors incorporating immersive technologies into surgery simulation for surgical skills training, with a growing number of researchers delving into this domain. Relevant experiences and patterns need to be summarized urgently to enable researchers to establish a comprehensive understanding of this field, thus promoting its continuous growth. This study provides a forward-looking perspective by reviewing the latest development of immersive interactive technologies for surgery simulation. The investigation commences from a technological standpoint, delving into the core aspects of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) technologies, namely, haptic rendering and tracking. Subsequently, we summarize recent work based on the categorization of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery simulations. Finally, the study showcases the impressive performance and expansive potential of immersive technologies in surgical simulation while also discussing the current limitations. We find that the design of interaction and the choice of immersive technology in virtual surgery development should be closely related to the corresponding interactive operations in the real surgical speciality. This alignment facilitates targeted technological adaptations in the direction of greater applicability and fidelity of simulation.

To determine the effect of different virtual reality training intervals on individual performance to facilitate the optimal implementation of medical virtual reality training.

Emergency scenarios in virtual reality were performed by 36 medical students from the Medical University of Vienna. After baseline training, the participants were randomised into three groups of equal size and underwent virtual reality training at different time intervals (monthly, one training after 3 months, and no further training) before undergoing final assessment training after 6 months.

Group A, with monthly training exercises, improved their performance score significantly by 1.75 mean score points compared with Group B, who repeated baseline training after 3 months. Statistically significant difference was indicated when comparing Group A with Group C, which was not further trained and served as the control group.

One-month intervals are associated with statistically significant performance improvements compared with additional training after 3 months and to a control group without regular training. The results show that training intervals of 3 months or longer are insufficient to achieve high performance scores. Virtual reality training is a cost-effective alternative to conventional simulation-based training for regular practice.

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy in pediatric setting has unique features and, therefore, requires an approach that is tailored to pediatric practice. There is still heterogeneity between training programs worldwide in terms of duration, number of procedures and assessment during and at the end of the training process.

We conducted a narrative review aiming to describe and summarize the existing literature on the various training methods for pediatric GI endoscopy to highlight the significance of specific pediatric endoscopy training.

Simulation-based tools have been implemented in several training programs, providing a safer learning environment for trainees, especially in their earlier stages of training. Assessment of competence is gradually shifting from the sole evaluation of procedural numbers towards the development of more reliable and valid tools that can accurately measure technical competence. Despite such seismic shift, there is still a need for a standardized and comprehensive pediatric-oriented endoscopy curriculum that incorporates acquisition of procedural skills education and is built on the current competency-based model of training. All the above must sink their roots in trainees and to ensure that the endoscopists of tomorrow are capable of delivering high quality of care for children undergoing endoscopy.

It is crucial to parallelly focus on the way trainers teach trainees. In this context, the implementation of "train the trainers" courses has improved important quality meters in GI endoscopy. Future research should put the focus on the potential subsequent favorable benefits of these changes on child health.

The impact of robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) on the incidence of postoperative complication is debatable and unclear.

This study enrolled 200 patients with GC who were surgically treated and consisted of 100 RG and 100 laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) cases using an ultrasonic scalpel. The short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. These outcomes were compared using a 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matching analysis.

After PS matching, 76 cases in each group were well matched. Mean surgical time was significantly longer in the RG group than in the LG group (393 vs. 342 min, p < 0.005), whereas mean blood loss during surgery was significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group (30.1 vs. 50.1 mL, p = 0.023). The median number of surgeons who attend the main part of the surgery was significantly less in the RG group than in the LG group (2.0 vs. 3.0, p = 0.01). The rate of severe intra-abdominal infectious complication was significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group (0% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.014). The duration from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly shorter in the RG group than in the LG group (29.6 ± 11.0 vs. 45.2 ± 27.8 days, p = 0.046).

RG using an ultrasonic scalpel may be a viable alternative to LG because of the improvement in the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications after curative surgery for GC.

With the ongoing changes in graduate medical education, emphasis has been placed on simulation models to increase clinical exposure and optimize learning. In specific, high-fidelity simulation presents as a potential option for procedural-skill development in interventional radiology. With improved haptic, visual, and tactile dynamics, high-fidelity endovascular simulators have gained increasing support from trainees and certified interventionalists alike. The 2 most common high-fidelity endovascular simulators utilized today are the Procedicus VIST and ANGIO Mentor, which contain notable differences in technical features, case availability, and cost. From the perspective of a trainee, high-fidelity simulation allows for the ability to perform a greater volume of cases. Additionally, without the risk of potential harm to the patient, trainees can focus on repetition and improved performance in a stress-free environment. When errors are made, high-fidelity simulator metrics will generate instantaneous feedback and error notification, erasing ambiguity and thus facilitating learning. Furthermore, in an environment devoid of time and cost stressors, the supervising physician is afforded the opportunity to properly mentor and instruct the trainee throughout the case. For the experienced interventionalists, high-fidelity simulation allows for a decreased learning curve for new procedures or techniques, as well as the opportunity for procedure rehearsal for unusual or high-risk cases. Despite the limitations created by cost, high-fidelity endovascular simulation should continue to be increasingly utilized in the development of the interventional radiology curriculum.

Endoscopy has traditionally been taught with novices practicing on real patients under the supervision of experienced endoscopists. Recently, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought simulation training to the forefront. Simulation training can provide trainees with the chance to practice their skills in a learner-centred, risk-free environment. It is important to ensure that skills gained through simulation positively transfer to the clinical environment. This updated review was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) simulation training in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

We searched the following health professions, educational, and computer databases until 12 July 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, AMED, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technology and Engineering, Computer and Information Systems Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. We also searched the grey literature until November 2017.

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing VR endoscopy simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training with outcomes measured on humans in the clinical setting, including conventional patient-based training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation, or no training. We also included trials comparing two different methods of VR training.

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. We pooled data for meta-analysis where participant groups were similar, studies assessed the same intervention and comparator, and had similar definitions of outcome measures. We calculated risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes when studies reported the same or different outcome measures, respectively. We used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

We included 18 trials (421 participants; 3817 endoscopic procedures). We judged three trials as at low risk of bias. Ten trials compared VR training with no training, five trials with conventional endoscopy training, one trial with another form of endoscopy simulation training, and two trials compared two different methods of VR training. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across our four comparisons, we did not perform a meta-analysis for several outcomes. We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, low, or very low due to risk of bias, imprecision, and heterogeneity.Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus no training: There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect on composite score of competency (MD 3.10, 95% CI -0.16 to 6.36; 1 trial, 24 procedures; low-quality evidence). Composite score of competency was based on 5-point Likert scales assessing seven domains: atraumatic technique, colonoscope advancement, use of instrument controls, flow of procedure, use of assistants, knowledge of specific procedure, and overall performance. Scoring range was from 7 to 35, a higher score representing a higher level of competence. Virtual reality training compared to no training likely provides participants with some benefit, as measured by independent procedure completion (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.26; 6 trials, 815 procedures; moderate-quality evidence). We evaluated overall rating of performance (MD 0.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75; 1 trial, 18 procedures), visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.00; 1 trial, 55 procedures), performance time (MD -0.20 minutes, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.30; 2 trials, 29 procedures), and patient discomfort (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.35; 2 trials, 145 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. No trials reported procedure-related complications or critical flaws (e.g. bleeding, luminal perforation) (3 trials, 550 procedures; moderate-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus conventional patient-based training: One trial reported composite score of competency but did not provide sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Virtual reality training compared to conventional patient-based training resulted in fewer independent procedure completions (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; 2 trials, 174 procedures; low-quality evidence). We evaluated performance time (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.80; 2 trials, 34 procedures), overall rating of performance (MD -0.90, 95% CI -4.40 to 2.60; 1 trial, 16 procedures), and visualisation of mucosa (MD 0.0, 95% CI -6.02 to 6.02; 1 trial, 18 procedures), all with very low-quality evidence. Virtual reality training in combination with conventional training appears to be advantageous over VR training alone. No trials reported any procedure-related complications or critical flaws (3 trials, 72 procedures; very low-quality evidence).Virtual reality endoscopy simulation training versus another form of endoscopy simulation: Based on one study, there were no differences between groups with respect to composite score of competency, performance time, and visualisation of mucosa. Virtual reality training in combination with another form of endoscopy simulation training did not appear to confer any benefit compared to VR training alone.Two methods of virtual reality training: Based on one study, a structured VR simulation-based training curriculum compared to self regulated learning on a VR simulator appears to provide benefit with respect to a composite score evaluating competency. Based on another study, a progressive-learning curriculum that sequentially increases task difficulty provides benefit with respect to a composite score of competency over the structured VR training curriculum.

VR simulation-based training can be used to supplement early conventional endoscopy training for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, we found insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of VR simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training. The quality of the current evidence was low due to inadequate randomisation, allocation concealment, and/or blinding of outcome assessment in several trials. Further trials are needed that are at low risk of bias, utilise outcome measures with strong evidence of validity and reliability, and examine the optimal nature and duration of training.

Surgical residencies have increasingly incorporated both digital and mannequin simulation into their training programs. The aim of our review was to identify all digital and mannequin maxillofacial simulators available for education and training, highlight their benefit, and critically assess the evidence in support of these educational resources.

We performed a comprehensive literature review of all peer-reviewed publications of digital and mannequin simulators that met the inclusion criteria, defined as any simulator used in education or training. All simulators used in surgical planning were excluded. Before the query, it was hypothesized that most studies would be descriptive in nature and supported by low levels of evidence. Literature search strategies included the use of multiple combinations of key search terms, review of titles and abstracts, and precise identification of the use of the simulator described. All statistics were descriptive.

The primary search yielded 259 results, from which 22 total simulators published on from 2001 to 2016 were identified using the inclusion and exclusion criteria: 10 virtual reality haptic-based simulators, 6 physical model simulators, and 6 Web-based simulators used for a variety of procedures such as dental skills, instrument handling, orthognathic surgery (Le Fort I osteotomy, vertical ramus osteotomy, bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy), genioplasty, bone grafting, sinus surgery, cleft lip repair, orbital floor repair, and oral biopsy. Only 9 formalized studies were completed; these were classified as low-level evidence-based cohort studies (Levels IV and V). All other simulator reports were descriptive in nature. There were no studies with high levels of evidence completed (Level I to III).

The results of this review suggest that, although seemingly beneficial to the trainee in maxillofacial surgery, simulation in education in this field is an underused commodity because of the significant lack of scientific and validated study designs reported on in the literature thus far. The maxillofacial and simulation communities would benefit from studies on utility and efficacy with higher levels of evidence.

Surgical simulators have recently attracted attention because they enable the evaluation of the surgical skills of medical doctors and the performance of medical devices. However, thermal damage to the human body during surgery is difficult to evaluate using conventional surgical simulators. In this study, we propose a functional surgical model with a temperature-indicating function for the evaluation of thermal damage during surgery. The simulator is made of a composite material of polydimethylsiloxane and a thermochromic dye, which produces an irreversible color change as the temperature increases. Using this material, we fabricated a three-dimensional blood vessel model using the lost-wax process. We succeeded in fabricating a renal vessel model for simulation of catheter ablation. Increases in the temperature of the materials can be measured by image analysis of their color change. The maximum measurement error of the temperature was approximately -1.6 °C/+2.4 °C within the range of 60 °C to 100 °C.

The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using augmented reality (AR) glasses in central line simulation by novice operators and compare its efficacy to standard central line simulation/teaching.

This was a prospective randomized controlled study enrolling 32 novice operators. Subjects were randomized on a 1:1 basis to either simulation using the augmented virtual reality glasses or simulation using conventional instruction.

The study was conducted in tertiary-care urban teaching hospital.

A total of 32 adult novice central line operators with no visual or auditory impairments were enrolled. Medical doctors, respiratory therapists, and sleep technicians were recruited from the medical field.

The mean time for AR placement in the AR group was 71±43 s, and the time to internal jugular (IJ) cannulation was 316±112 s. There was no significant difference in median (minimum, maximum) time (seconds) to IJ cannulation for those who were in the AR group and those who were not (339 [130, 550] vs 287 [35, 475], p=0.09), respectively. There was also no significant difference between the two groups in median total procedure time (524 [329, 792] vs 469 [198, 781], p=0.29), respectively. There was a significant difference in the adherence level between the two groups favoring the AR group (p=0.003).

AR simulation of central venous catheters in manikins is feasible and efficacious in novice operators as an educational tool. Future studies are recommended in this area as it is a promising area of medical education.

Simulation has played an increasing role in surgical training in recent years, this follows from various reports such as the Chief Medical Officer annual report and Sir John Temple's 'Time for Training' and also from other factors such as increasing focus on efficiency and transparency within the healthcare system. Evidence has shown that simulation can develop and improve technical, clinical, communication and management skills. With technological advances, the quality of simulation has also improved with more realistic models and environment. We have undertaken a review of recent drivers for simulation training in the UK, current techniques and have focused on the application of simulation training within the current UK Neurosurgical curriculum for newly appointed trainees.

To review the most recent literature and contemporary role of the use of porcine and chicken models in laparoscopic and robotic simulation exercises, for training and skill assessment.

There are multiple types of the simulators which include mechanical, virtual reality, hybrid simulators and animal models. The recent literature has seen insurgence of several of such simulators, specifically the animate ones comprising porcine and chicken models. The different training models reported have evolved from generalized and simpler, to a more task dedicated and complex versions. Unlike in the past, the recent publications include analysis of these models incorporating different measures of validity assessment.

On account of the natural tissue properties inherent to these porcine and chicken models, they are proving to be instrumental in acquisition of higher surgical skills such as dissection, suturing and use of energy sources, all of which are required in real-time clinical scenarios be it laparoscopy or robotic-assisted procedures. In-vivo training in the animal model continues to be, perhaps, the most sophisticated training method before resorting to real-time surgery.

Simulators are widely used in occupations where practice in authentic environments would involve high human or economic risks. Surgical procedures can be simulated by increasingly complex and expensive techniques. This review gives an update on computer-based virtual reality (VR) simulators in training for laparoscopic cholecystectomies.

From leading databases (Medline, Cochrane, Embase), randomised or controlled trials and the latest systematic reviews were systematically searched and reviewed. Twelve randomised trials involving simulators were identified and analysed, as well as four controlled studies. Furthermore, seven studies comparing black boxes and simulators were included.

The results indicated any kind of simulator training (black box, VR) to be beneficial at novice level. After VR training, novice surgeons seemed to be able to perform their first live cholecystectomies with fewer errors, and in one trial the positive effect remained during the first ten cholecystectomies. No clinical follow-up data were found. Optimal learning requires skills training to be conducted as part of a systematic training program. No data on the cost-benefit of simulators were found, the price of a VR simulator begins at EUR 60 000.

Theoretical background to learning and limited research data support the use of simulators in the early phases of surgical training. The cost of buying and using simulators is justified if the risk of injuries and complications to patients can be reduced. Developing surgical skills requires repeated training. In order to achieve optimal learning a validated training program is needed.

Traditionally, training in gastrointestinal endoscopy has been based upon an apprenticeship model, with novice endoscopists learning basic skills under the supervision of experienced preceptors in the clinical setting. Over the last two decades, however, the growing awareness of the need for patient safety has brought the issue of simulation-based training to the forefront. While the use of simulation-based training may have important educational and societal advantages, the effectiveness of virtual reality gastrointestinal endoscopy simulators has yet to be clearly demonstrated.

To determine whether virtual reality simulation training can supplement and/or replace early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience.

Health professions, educational and computer databases were searched until November 2011 including The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Biosis Previews, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, ERIC, Education Full Text, CBCA Education, Career and Technical Education @ Scholars Portal, Education Abstracts @ Scholars Portal, Expanded Academic ASAP @ Scholars Portal, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Abstracts in New Technologies and Engineering and Computer & Information Systems Abstracts. The grey literature until November 2011 was also searched.

Randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials comparing virtual reality endoscopy (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy) simulation training versus any other method of endoscopy training including conventional patient-based training, in-job training, training using another form of endoscopy simulation (e.g. low-fidelity simulator), or no training (however defined by authors) were included.  Trials comparing one method of virtual reality training versus another method of virtual reality training (e.g. comparison of two different virtual reality simulators) were also included. Only trials measuring outcomes on humans in the clinical setting (as opposed to animals or simulators) were included.

Two authors (CMS, MES) independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, and extracted data on the trial characteristics and outcomes. Due to significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity it was not possible to pool study data in order to perform a meta-analysis. Where data were available for each continuous outcome we calculated standardized mean difference with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat analysis. Where data were available for dichotomous outcomes we calculated relative risk with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat-analysis.

Thirteen trials, with 278 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared simulation-based training with conventional patient-based endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) whereas nine trials compared simulation-based training with no training. Only three trials were at low risk of bias. Simulation-based training, as compared with no training, generally appears to provide participants with some advantage over their untrained peers as measured by composite score of competency, independent procedure completion, performance time, independent insertion depth, overall rating of performance or competency error rate and mucosal visualization. Alternatively, there was no conclusive evidence that simulation-based training was superior to conventional patient-based training, although data were limited.

The results of this systematic review indicate that virtual reality endoscopy training can be used to effectively supplement early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) in diagnostic oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy and/or sigmoidoscopy for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. However, there remains insufficient evidence to advise for or against the use of virtual reality simulation-based training as a replacement for early conventional endoscopy training (apprenticeship model) for health professions trainees with limited or no prior endoscopic experience. There is a great need for the development of a reliable and valid measure of endoscopic performance prior to the completion of further randomised clinical trials with high methodological quality.

Current Laparoscopic simulators have limited usefulness and patients have been used for training since the dawn of surgery. NUGITS (Northumbrian Upper Gastro Intestinal Team of Surgeons) Laparoscopic Skills courses utilise hands-on experience with simulators moving to live operating on volunteer patients. It is vital to know that the volunteer patient is not disadvantaged by greater surgical risk.

This was a case-controlled prospective comparison of patients undergoing both Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) [n=51] and Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia (LIH) [n=62] during NUGITS training courses. They are compared with a matched (age, sex and ASA grade) control group LC (n=51) and LIH (n=62) operated on by consultants. The outcome measures were surgical peri-and post-operative complications, post-operative hospital stay, readmission and early recurrence of inguinal hernia (<6 months).

In the LC cohort, there was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (p=0.07) or readmission (p=0.16) in both the groups. The mean operating time was higher in the trainee compared to the control group (p=0.001). There was no difference in the post-operative morbidity or mortality in either group. In LIH cohort, the mean operating time was higher in the trainee compared with the control group. There was no significant difference in post-operative complications (p>0.05) and early post-operative recurrence of hernia (p>0.05).

The post-operative outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery during laparoscopic training courses are similar to consultant-operated patients. Thus, it is acceptable and safe to encourage patients to volunteer for laparoscopic training courses.

Virtual reality (VR) simulation for laparoscopic surgical training is now a reality. There is increasing evidence that the use of VR simulation is a powerful adjunct to traditional surgical apprenticeship in the current climate of reduced time spent in training.

This article reviews the early evidence supporting the case for VR simulation training in laparoscopic surgery.

A standard literature search was conducted using the following phrases--'virtual reality in surgical training', 'surgical training', 'laparoscopic training' and 'simulation in surgical training'.

This article outlines the early evidence which supports the use of VR simulation in laparoscopic training and the need for further research into this new training technique.

The aim of this paper is to define a strategy for the development and organisation of a surgical skills centre. The areas of interest can be divided into decisions about who, what and where to teach, the importance of an approach which is competency-based, definition of staff to run the centre, and also the use of the centre for the purposes of assessment, as well as training. The efficient delivery of this service will be augmented by adopting a multi-disciplinary and multi-professional approach, and must also be malleable enough to adopt future developments, such as web-based learning. Simulation is now the preferred mode of practice for commencement of surgical training. Surgical skills centres must be able to supply users with tools in a suitably designed environment, which enables them to move along a curriculum which is delivered in a competency-based manner.

The assessment of new technologies in oncological surgery is an important part of clinical research in cancer. The special characteristics of surgeons and surgical techniques determine particular problems. In this review, from the perspective of efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency, problematic specific aspects are discussed for diagnostic and therapeutic technologies.

At the present time the development of computers allows access to some three-dimensional models (3D) of physiological or pathological human situations obtained from patients with different medical or surgical problems. These models have a wide variety of applications: knowledge of the pathogenic mechanisms, help in diagnosis, planning of surgical strategies, training of surgical residents, teaching of medicine and surgery, design of devices and materials for use in medical and surgical practice or even distance interventions. Our objective is to design a 3D model of the inguinal region with the purpose of improving knowledge of the pathogenic mechanisms of inguinal hernia, the planning of surgical strategies and the teaching of the surgery of these hernias. They can also be used study the mechanical response of biomaterials into the abdominal wall.

The da Vinci tele-robot necessitates the acquisition of new skills and surgical educators must develop standardized training programmes. It is possible that virtual reality (VR) computer simulation maybe used and it is necessary to define whether a simulator is an appropriate tool.

Ten surgical novices performed a series of five tasks, ten times on a commercially available VR robotic simulator. Two experts repeated the series of tasks twice in an attempt to validate the simulator.

Each of the five tasks displayed statistically significant learning curves. Error scores did not improve significantly over successive repetitions except in one task. The experts completed two of the tasks in a significantly faster time.

Practice sessions on a VR simulator improve technical performance. The simulator enables surgeons to mount the early part of the learning curve within a laboratory environment, which may lead to a more effective training programme.

Despite awareness of the limitations of current selection and competency assessments, there is little consensus and alternatives have not been readily accepted. Essential surgical skills include visuospatial and technical ability. The aim of this study was to survey current methods of higher surgical trainee selection and assessment. We suggest ways to improve the process.

Nine surgical training programmes in the London deanery were surveyed through questionnaires to programme directors, existing trainees and examination of deanery publications.

Testing of visuospatial and technical ability was piloted at selection only in a single general surgical department. Practical skills were assessed in 3/9 (33%) specialties (ENT, plastic and general surgery). Once selected, no specialty tested visuospatial and technical ability. Practical skills were tested in only 1/9 (11%) specialties (plastic surgery). The remaining 8/9 (89%) were 'assessed' by interview.

Lack of visuospatial and technical ability assessment was identified at selection and during higher surgical training. Airlines have long recognised early identification of these qualities as critical for efficient training. There is a need for more objective methods in this area prior to selection as time to assess surgical trainees during long apprenticeships is no longer available. We advocate a suitably validated competency-based model during and at completion of training.

Within the past decade, there has been increasing interest in simulation-based devices for training and assessment of technical skills, especially for minimally invasive techniques such as laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to investigate the perceptions of senior and junior surgeons to virtual reality simulation within the context of current training opportunities for basic laparoscopic procedures.

A postal questionnaire was sent to 245 consultants and their corresponding specialist registrar (SpR), detailing laparoscopic surgical practice and their knowledge and use of virtual reality (VR) surgical simulators.

One hundred ninety-one (78%) consultants and 103(42%) SpRs returned questionnaires; 16%(10/61) of junior SpRs (year 1-4) had performed more than 50 laparoscopic cholecystectomies to date compared with 76% (32/42) of senior SpRs (year 5-6) (P < 0.001); 90% (55/61) of junior SpRs and 67% (28/42) of senior SpRs were keen to augment their training with VR (P = 0.007); 81% (238/294) of all surgeons agreed that VR has a useful role in the laparoscopic surgical training curriculum.

There is a lack of experience in index laparoscopic cases of junior SpRs, and laparoscopic VR simulation is recognized as a useful mode of practice to acquire technical skills. This should encourage surgical program directors to drive the integration of simulation-based training into the surgical curriculum.

To reduce the complication rate associated with laparoscopic surgery and to improve training, several simulators have been incorporated into training curricula and skills courses. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages and compare the different types of simulators available. We also reviewed the literature to assess the acquisition of skills using these simulators and their transfer to real operations. It is important to realize that currently, any form of simulation is merely an adjunct to, and not a replacement for, traditional methods of training and that supervision and feedback are essential. More collaboration is needed between urologists and simulator companies to produce operation-specific simulated modules for urologic procedures.

Learning the craft of surgery is central to every surgical program. Although effective, acquisition of skills, particularly that of minimal access surgery in the operating theater, is becoming increasingly difficult. Published data indicate that the early phase of the learning curve could be achieved outside the operating room. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal training schemes and assessment tools. With an increase in the number of operations performed endoscopically and the number of surgeons performing them, the importance of well-defined and validated training programs cannot be overemphasized.

To assess the first commercially available virtual reality (VR) simulator to incorporate procedural modules for training of inexperienced gynaecological surgeons to perform laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy.

Prospective cohort study.

Departments of surgery and gynaecology in central London teaching hospitals.

Thirty gynaecological surgeons were recruited to the study, and were divided into novice (<10 laparoscopic procedures), intermediate (20-50) and experienced (>100) groups.

All subjects were orientated to the VR simulator with a basic skills task, followed by performing ten repetitions of the virtual ectopic pregnancy module, in a distributed manner.

Operative performance was assessed by the time taken to perform surgery, blood loss and total instrument path length.

There were significant differences between the groups at the second repetition of the ectopic module for time taken (median 551.1 versus 401.2 versus 249.2 seconds, P = 0.001), total blood loss (median 304.2 versus 187.4 versus 123.3 ml, P = 0.031) and total instrument path length (median 17.8 versus 8.3 versus 6.8 m, P = 0.023). The learning curves of the experienced operators plateaued at the second session, although greater numbers of sessions were necessary for intermediate (seven) and novice (nine) surgeons to achieve similar levels of skill.

Gynaecological surgeons with minimal laparoscopic experience can improve their skills during short-phase training on a VR procedural module. In contrast, experienced operators showed nonsignificant improvements. Thus, VR simulation may be useful for the early part of the learning curve for surgeons who wish to learn to perform laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy.

Surgical education has always been challenging and is being made more difficult with the changes in the surgical environment. In the past decade, the number of patients available for educational purposes has decreased because of the development of technology that has significantly reduced their time of stay in the hospital and has also moved many surgical procedures to ambulatory services. Technologic advances also create the demand for more specialized training. The increased number of undergraduate, postgraduate students, and clinical fellows has also affected the educational mandate of the academic hospitals. Alternative ways to teach medicine, and especially surgery, are becoming inevitable. One such method is to teach students outside the operating room in a simulated environment. This article reports on the developments of surgical education centers and provides guidance for those who might wish to develop such educational facilities. For further information, visit www.cesei.org.

To develop an evidence-based virtual reality laparoscopic training curriculum for novice laparoscopic surgeons to achieve a proficient level of skill prior to participating in live cases.

Technical skills for laparoscopic surgery must be acquired within a competency-based curriculum that begins in the surgical skills laboratory. Implementation of this program necessitates the definition of the validity, learning curves and proficiency criteria on the training tool.

The study recruited 40 surgeons, classified into experienced (performed >100 laparoscopic cholecystectomies) or novice groups (<10 laparoscopic cholecystectomies). Ten novices and 10 experienced surgeons were tested on basic tasks, and 11 novices and 9 experienced surgeons on a procedural module for dissection of Calot triangle. Performance of the 2 groups was assessed using time, error, and economy of movement parameters.

All basic tasks demonstrated construct validity (Mann-Whitney U test, P < 0.05), and learning curves for novices plateaued at a median of 7 repetitions (Friedman's test, P < 0.05). Expert surgeons demonstrated a learning rate at a median of 2 repetitions (P < 0.05). Performance on the dissection module demonstrated significant differences between experts and novices (P < 0.002); learning curves for novice subjects plateaued at the fourth repetition (P < 0.05). Expert benchmark criteria were defined for validated parameters on each task.

A competency-based training curriculum for novice laparoscopic surgeons has been defined. This can serve to ensure that junior trainees have acquired prerequisite levels of skill prior to entering the operating room, and put them directly into practice.

Simulation technology in laparoscopic surgery has developed in response to a need to teach fundamental surgical skills in a safe environment. The skill set needed was defined carefully according to the classic educational model of needs assessment. Once defined, the skills were modeled in a simulator. The recognition that a simulator need not have high fidelity to achieve significant educational value was important in keeping costs reasonably low. Intrinsic to an effective simulation program is a set of metrics or measurements of performance. These metrics provide motivation for the student and allow comparison among students. Once shown to be reliable and valid, the simulator metrics can be used to set reasonable goals and standards for certification. Although simulators permit verification of learning, point simulation testing cannot by itself be used at present to ensure competence. Until the predictive value of these tests has been validated further, competence still needs to be determined by expert assessment of observed performance in real cases and by measurable outcome variables from real procedures. Simulation training is most beneficial when incorporated into a curriculum that teaches the accompanying knowledge and judgment essential for safe practice of the skills taught in the simulator. The FLS program distributed by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and the American College of Surgeons is an example of a carefully planned and validated program that incorporates these principles in laparoscopic surgery education. The lessons learned from development of the FLS program can be useful in designing a similar program for flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate virtual reality (VR) simulation for endovascular training of surgeons inexperienced in this technique.

Twenty consultant vascular surgeons were divided into those who had performed >50 endovascular procedures (e.g. aortic and carotid stent) as primary operator (n=8), and those having performed <10 procedures (n=12). To test for endovascular skill rather than procedural knowledge, all subjects performed a renal artery balloon angioplasty and stent procedure. The simulator uses real tools with active force feedback, and provides a realistic image of the virtual patient. Surgeons with endovascular skills performed two repetitions and those without completed six repetitions of the same task. The simulator recorded time taken for the procedure, the amount of contrast fluid used and total fluoroscopy time.

Initially, surgeons with endovascular skills were significantly faster (median 571.5 vs. 900.0 s, p=0.039) and used less contrast fluid (19.1 vs. 42.9 ml, p=0.047) than inexperienced operators, though differences for fluoroscopy time were not significant (273 vs. 441 s, p=0.305). Over the six sessions, the inexperienced group made significant improvements in performance for time taken (p=0.007) and contrast fluid usage (p=0.021), achieving similar scores at the end of the training program to the experienced group.

Surgeons with minimal endovascular experience can improve their time taken and contrast usage during short-phase training on a VR endovascular task. VR simulation may be useful for the early part of the learning curve for surgeons who wish to expand their endovascular interests.

Current training models are limited by an unstructured curriculum, financial costs, human costs, and time constraints. With the newly mandated resident surgical competency, training programs are struggling to find viable methods of assessing and documenting the surgical skills of trainees. Virtual-reality technologies have been used for decades in flight simulation to train and assess competency, and there has been a recent push in surgical specialties to incorporate virtual-reality simulation into residency programs. These efforts have culminated in an FDA-approved carotid stenting simulator. What role virtual reality will play in the evolution of ophthalmology surgical curriculum is uncertain. The current apprentice system has served the art of surgery for over 100 years, and we foresee virtual reality working synergistically with our current curriculum modalities to streamline and enhance the resident's learning experience.