Simulation training in urology.
Journal
Current opinion in urology
ISSN: 1473-6586
Titre abrégé: Curr Opin Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9200621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2024
01 Jan 2024
Historique:
medline:
7
12
2023
pubmed:
1
11
2023
entrez:
1
11
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This review outlines recent innovations in simulation technology as it applies to urology. It is essential for the next generation of urologists to attain a solid foundation of technical and nontechnical skills, and simulation technology provides a variety of safe, controlled environments to acquire this baseline knowledge. With a focus on urology, this review first outlines the evidence to support surgical simulation, then discusses the strides being made in the development of 3D-printed models for surgical skill training and preoperative planning, virtual reality models for different urologic procedures, surgical skill assessment for simulation, and integration of simulation into urology residency curricula. Simulation continues to be an integral part of the journey towards the mastery of skills necessary for becoming an expert urologist. Clinicians and researchers should consider how to further incorporate simulation technology into residency training and help future generations of urologists throughout their career.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37909886
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000001141
pii: 00042307-990000000-00123
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
37-42Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01 CA273031
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
simulation, n. meanings, etymology and more | Oxford English Dictionary. Available at: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/simulation_n?tab=meaning_and_use [Accessed August 9, 2023].
Aggarwal R, Darzi A. Technical-skills training in the 21st century. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:2695–2696.
Birkmeyer JD, Finks JF, O’Reilly A, et al. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med 2013; 369:1434–1442.
Ma R, Reddy S, Vanstrum EB, Hung AJ. Innovations in urologic surgical training. Curr Urol Rep 2021; 22:26.
Aydin A, Ahmed K, Abe T, et al. Effect of simulation-based training on surgical proficiency and patient outcomes: a randomised controlled clinical and educational trial. Eur Urol 2022; 81:385–393.
Chu TN, Wong EY, Ma R, et al. A multiinstitution study on the association of virtual reality skills with continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus 2023; doi:10.1016/j.euf.2023.05.011.
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.05.011
Ghazi A, Melnyk R, Farooq S, et al. Validity of a patient-specific percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) simulated surgical rehearsal platform: impact on patient and surgical outcomes. World J Urol 2022; 40:627–637.
Boulenger de Hauteclocque A, Michiels C, Sarrazin J, et al. Three dimensional printing technology used to create a high-fidelity ureteroscopy simulator: development and validity assessment (Rein-3D-Print-UroCCR-39). Urology 2023; 176:36–41.
Llorente-Ortega M, Polo R, Chiva S, et al. The development and validation of a new simulator for endourology. Actas Urol Esp 2023; 47:236–243.
Ghazi A. A call for change. Can 3D printing replace cadavers for surgical training? Urol Clin North Am 2022; 49:39–56.
Kho Y, Yoon HS, Park DH, et al. Effectiveness of a newly-developed training module using 3D printing for the navigation during retrograde intrarenal surgery. Investig Clin Urol 2022; 63:554–562.
Deyirmendjian C, Nguyen DD, Andonian S, et al. Simulation-based prostate enucleation training: Initial experience using 3D-printed organ phantoms. Can Urol Assoc J 2022; 16:409–416.
Trelles Guzmán CR, Mainez Rodríguez JA, Aguado-Maestro I, et al. 3D printed model for flexible ureteroscopy training, a low-cost option for surgical training. Actas Urol Esp 2022; 46:16–21.
Guliev B, Talyshinskii A. Impact of high-fidelity nonbiological kidney puncture trainer on residents’ skills during 30-day practical course. Urology 2022; 168:59–63.
Randhawa H, Wang Y, Hoogenes J, et al. Development and initial validation of a cost-effective, re-usable, ultrasound-compatible suprapubic catheter insertion training simulator. Can Urol Assoc J 2022; 16:63–69.
Campi R, Pecoraro A, Vignolini G, et al. The first entirely 3D-printed training model for robot-assisted kidney transplantation: the RAKT Box. Eur Urol Open Sci 2023; 53:98–105.
Melnyk R, Oppenheimer D, Ghazi AE. How specific are patient-specific simulations? Analyzing the accuracy of 3D-printing and modeling to create patient-specific rehearsals for complex urological procedures. World J Urol 2022; 40:621–626.
McCabe M, Osinski T, Kashyap R, et al. Robotic assisted transplant nephrectomy: case series and training model for improving adoption. JSLS 2023; 27: e2022.00079.
Schlegel L, Ho M, Fields JM, et al. Standardizing evaluation of patient-specific 3D printed models in surgical planning: development of a cross-disciplinary survey tool for physician and trainee feedback. BMC Med Educ 2022; 22:614.
Nickel F, Cizmic A, Chand M. Telestration and augmented reality in minimally invasive surgery: an invaluable tool in the age of COVID-19 for remote proctoring and telementoring. JAMA Surg 2022; 157:169–170.
Felinska EA, Fuchs TE, Kogkas A, et al. Telestration with augmented reality improves surgical performance through gaze guidance. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:3557–3566.
Müller LR, Petersen J, Yamlahi A, et al. Robust hand tracking for surgical telestration. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2022; 17:1477–1486.
Piana A, Gallioli A, Amparore D, et al. Three-dimensional augmented reality-guided robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: breaking the limit of atheromatic plaques. Eur Urol 2022; 82:419–426.
Green CA, Chu SN, Huang E, et al. Teaching in the robotic environment: use of alternative approaches to guide operative instruction. Am J Surg 2020; 219:191–196.
Raison N, Harrison P, Abe T, et al. Procedural virtual reality simulation training for robotic surgery: a randomised controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2021; 35:6897–6902.
Cepek J, Wilson C, Denstedt J, et al. Portable endoscopic simulator for urologic training: a face/content and construct validity study. J Endourol 2022; 36:1495–1501.
Moore J, Whalen S, Rowe N, et al. A high-fidelity, virtual-reality, transurethral resection of bladder tumor simulator: validation as a tool for training. Can Urol Assoc J 2022; 16:E205–E211.
Lampotang S, Lizdas DE, Johnson WT, et al. Development and validation of a mixed-reality simulator for reducing biopsy core deviation during simulated freehand systematic prostate biopsy. Simul Healthc 2023.
van der Leun JA, Siem G, Meijer RP, Brinkman WM. Improving robotic skills by video review. J Endourol 2022; 36:1126–1135.
Covaciu F, Crisan N, Vaida C, et al. Integration of virtual reality in the control system of an innovative medical robot for single-incision laparoscopic surgery. Sensors 2023; 23:5400.
Kilinçarslan Ö, Türk Y, Vargör A, et al. Video gaming improves robotic surgery simulator success: a multiclinic study on robotic skills. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:1435–1442.
Lang F, Willuth E, Haney CM, et al. Serious gaming and virtual reality in the multimodal training of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized crossover study. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:2050–2061.
Pedersen H, Ståhl D, Ekelund M, et al. Visuospatial ability is associated to 2D laparoscopic simulator performance amongst surgical residents. Surg Open Sci 2023; 11:56–61.
Sloth SB, Jensen RD, Seyer-Hansen M, et al. Remote training in laparoscopy: a randomized trial comparing home-based self-regulated training to centralized instructor-regulated training. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:1444–1455.
Sloth SB, Jensen RD, Seyer-Hansen M, et al. Ticket to perform: an explorative study of trainees’ engagement in and transfer of surgical training. BMC Med Educ 2023; 23:64.
Liakos N, Moritz R, Leyh-Bannurah SR, et al. Chicken RAPS: chicken robot-assisted pyeloplasty simulation. validation study of a novel chicken model for wet laboratory training in robot-assisted pyeloplasty. Eur Urol Open Sci 2022; 46:82–87.
Lusty AJ, Bleackley J, Roberts M, et al. Hemorrhaging laparoscopic partial nephrectomy – feasibility of a novel simulation model. Can Urol Assoc J J Assoc Urol Can 2022; 16:119–124.
Conroy LM, Slovacek H, Blum KA, et al. Current landscape of surgical assessment models in urology residency training. J Urol 2023; 209:474–484.
Haque TF, Hui A, You J, et al. An assessment tool to provide targeted feedback to robotic surgical trainees: development and validation of the end-to-end assessment of suturing expertise (EASE). Urol Pract 2022; 9:532–539.
Vanstrum EB, Ma R, Maya-Silva Jacqueline, et al. Development and validation of an objective scoring tool to evaluate surgical dissection: dissection assessment for robotic technique (DART). Urol Pract 2021; 8:596–604.
Kiyasseh D, Ma R, Haque TF, et al. A vision transformer for decoding surgeon activity from surgical videos. Nat Biomed Eng 2023; 7:780–796.
Hung AJ, Bao R, Sunmola IO, et al. Capturing fine-grained details for video-based automation of suturing skills assessment. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2023; 18:545–552.
Valovska MT, Gomez G, Fineman R, et al. Analysis of flexible ureteroscopic motion and kinematic efficiency: a simulation-based pilot study. J Endourol 2022; 36:855–861.
Kim DY, Tan X, Jeong M, et al. A high-fidelity artificial urological system for the quantitative assessment of endoscopic skills. J Funct Biomater 2022; 13: doi:10.3390/jfb13040301.
doi: 10.3390/jfb13040301
Valovska MT, Yang J, Chen N, et al. Development of an automated composite ureteroscopic efficiency score through simulated ureteroscopic skills assessment. J Endourol 2023; doi:10.1089/end.2022.0820.
doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0820
Verhoeven DJ, Hillemans V, Leijte E, et al. Assessment of minimally invasive suturing skills: is instrument tracking an accurate prediction? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2023; 33:137–145.
Trinh L, Mingo S, Vanstrum EB, et al. Survival analysis using surgeon skill metrics and patient factors to predict urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus 2022; 8:623–630.
Ma R, Ramaswamy A, Xu J, et al. Surgical gestures as a method to quantify surgical performance and predict patient outcomes. NPJ Digit Med 2022; 5:187.
Chen Z, An J, Wu S, et al. Surgesture: a novel instrument based on surgical actions for objective skill assessment. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:6113–6121.
Ma R, Lee RS, Nguyen JH, et al. Tailored feedback based on clinically relevant performance metrics expedites the acquisition of robotic suturing skills-an unblinded pilot randomized controlled trial. J Urol 2022; 208:414–424.
Laca JA, Kocielnik R, Nguyen JH, et al. Using real-time feedback to improve surgical performance on a robotic tissue dissection task. Eur Urol Open Sci 2022; 46:15–21.
Rahimi AO, Ho K, Chang M, et al. A systematic review of robotic surgery curricula using a contemporary educational framework. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:2833–2841.
Please H, Biyani CS. How to implement a simulation-based education programme: lessons from the UK Urology Simulation Boot Camp. Indian J Surg 2022; 84: (Suppl 1): 18–26.
Stout M, Ballinger J, Posid T, et al. Advanced urology boot camp: a simulation-based curriculum to enhance fourth-year medical student procedural competency. Urol Pract 2023; 10:196–200.
Stout M, Posid T, Ballinger J, et al. Urology boot camp: a pilot medical student curriculum for common bedside urologic procedures. Urology 2022; 169:35–40.
Waldbillig F, von Rohr L, Nientiedt M, et al. Prospective, randomized comparative evaluation of a novel hands-on endourology training curriculum. Urol Int 2023; 107:179–185.
Melnyk R, Saba P, Holler T, et al. Design and implementation of an emergency undocking curriculum for robotic surgery. Simul Healthc 2022; 17:78–87.
Young M, Lewis C, Kailavasan M, et al. A systematic review of methodological principles and delivery of surgical simulation bootcamps. Am J Surg 2022; 223:1079–1087.
Moran GW, Margolin EJ, Wang CN, DeCastro GJ. Using gamification to increase resident engagement in surgical training: Our experience with a robotic surgery simulation league. Am J Surg 2022; 224 (1 Pt B):321–322.
Sinha A, West A, Vasdev N, et al. Current practises and the future of robotic surgical training. Surgeon 2023; 21:314–322.
Dell’Oglio P, Turri F, Larcher A, et al. Definition of a structured training curriculum for robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit in male patients: a delphi consensus study led by the ERUS Educational Board. Eur Urol Focus 2022; 8:160–164.