The ILLS Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Fellow Skills Curriculum.
Journal
Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2020
11 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
25
8
2020
medline:
11
11
2020
entrez:
25
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Laparoscopy is becoming the standard approach in liver surgery. As the degree of difficulty varies greatly from core skills to advanced procedures, strategies for teaching young surgeons need to be reconsidered. We here aimed to design a skills curriculum for LLR. Using the nominal group technique, 22 substeps of LLR were identified by 61 hepatobiliary surgeons. The raters were asked to rate (1) the difficulty of substeps and (2) the minimum number of times that the substep must be performed for mastery of the technique. According to the frequency of defined substeps, being estimated on the basis of high volume center experiences (n = 222 LLR; 1/2017-12/2018), the center's training capacity and defined goals for a 2-year fellowship were calculated. Ten surgical substeps (45%) are routinely performed and can thus be taught sufficiently at centers carrying out ≥50 LLR in 2 years. As the mobilization of the right liver lobe and the dissection of the hepatic artery or portal vein is performed in only 27% and 28% of all LLR, respectively, sufficient training can only be provided at centers with ≥100 LLRs in 2 years. Mastery of complex parenchymal dissection (19%) and hilar lymphadenectomy (8%) can only be achieved in center performing ≥200 LLR in 2 years. We here suggest a stepwise approach for training of hepatobiliary fellows in LLR. Based on the estimated complexity of the substeps and the size of the center, not every substep can be learned within 2 years.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32833753
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004175
pii: 00000658-202011000-00018
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
786-792Références
Kluger MD, Vigano L, Barroso R, et al. The learning curve in laparoscopic major liver resection. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sci 2013; 20:131–136.
Saito Y, Yamada S, Imura S, et al. A learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection: an effective training system and standardization of technique. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 23:45.
Wakabayashi G, Kaneko H. Can major laparoscopic liver and pancreas surgery become standard practices? J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2016; 23:89–91.
Yan Y, Cai X, Geller DA. Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current status. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 2017; 27:481–486.
Semm K. Pelvi-trainer, a training device in operative pelviscopy for teaching endoscopic ligation and suture technics. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1986; 46:60–62.
Beyer-Berjot L, Palter V, Grantcharov T, et al. Advanced training in laparoscopic abdominal surgery: a systematic review. Surgery 2014; 156:676–688.
Krenzien F, Wabitsch S, Haber P, et al. Validity of the Iwate criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing minimally invasive liver resection. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2018; 25:403–411.
Tanaka S, Kawaguchi Y, Kubo S, et al. Validation of index-based IWATE criteria as an improved difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic liver resection. Surgery 2019; 165:731–740.
Francis N, Penna M, Mackenzie H, et al. Consensus on structured training curriculum for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). Surg Endosc 2017; 31:2711–2719.
Kaijser MA, van Ramshorst GH, Emous M, et al. A Delphi consensus of the crucial steps in gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy procedures in the Netherlands. Obes Surg 2018; 28:2634–2643.
Khamis NN, Satava RM, Alnassar SA, et al. A stepwise model for simulation-based curriculum development for clinical skills, a modification of the six-step approach. Surg Endosc 2016; 30:279–287.
Wakabayashi G. What has changed after the Morioka consensus conference 2014 on laparoscopic liver resection? Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2016; 5:281–289.
Machado MA, Makdissi F, Surjan R. Laparoscopic glissonean approach: Making complex something easy or making suitable the unsuitable? Surg Oncol 2020; 33:196–200.
Nepomnayshy D, Alseidi AA, Fitzgibbons SC, et al. Identifying the need for and content of an advanced laparoscopic skills curriculum: results of a national survey. Am J Surg 2016; 211:421–425.
Vigano L, Laurent A, Tayar C, et al. The learning curve in laparoscopic liver resection: improved feasibility and reproducibility. Ann Surg 2009; 250:772–782.
van der Poel MJ, Besselink MG, Cipriani F, et al. Outcome and learning curve in 159 consecutive patients undergoing total laparoscopic hemihepatectomy. JAMA Surg 2016; 151:923–928.
Ghaderi I, Fitzgibbons S, Watanabe Y, et al. Surgical skills curricula in American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes: an international survey. Am J Surg 2017; 213:678–686.
Bandura A, Walters RH. Social Learning and Personality Development. Holt, Rinehart Winst Canada Ltd.
Strickland A, Fairhurst K, Lauder C, et al. Development of an ex vivo simulated training model for laparoscopic liver resection. Surg Endosc 2011; 25:1677–1682.
Palter VN, Orzech N, Reznick RK, et al. Validation of a structured training and assessment curriculum for technical skill acquisition in minimally invasive surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2013; 257:224–230.
Qiu J, Chen S, Chengyou D. A systematic review of robotic-assisted liver resection and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic neoplasms. Surg Endosc 2016; 30:862–875.
Chen P, Hu R, Liang J, et al. Toward a fully robotic surgery: performing robotic major liver resection with no table-side surgeon. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 2019; 15:e1985.
Collins JW, Levy J, Stefanidis D, et al. Utilising the Delphi process to develop a proficiency-based progression train-the-trainer course for robotic surgery training. Eur Urol 2019; 75:775–785.