Literature DB >> 11587686

The tail of the learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

A J Voitk1, S G Tsao, S Ignatius.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study estimates the number of laparoscopic cholecystectomies required until improvement ceases, assesses the magnitude of such improvement, and provides some insight into the mechanism by which it takes place.
METHODS: Data from 500 consecutive laparoscopic cholecystectomies were analyzed from a prospective data base for number of short and long operations and operative time.
RESULTS: There was a 40% decrease (P <0.05) in average operative time over the first 200 operations. Significant decrease in the number of longer operations, increase of shorter cases, and decrease in the range of operative time were noted. The major contributor was a marked shortening of longer cases, without much increased speed of shorter operations.
CONCLUSIONS: For laparoscopic cholecystectomy, improvement persists for about 200 operations, resulting in a 40% reduction in operative time. The primary mechanism of improvement seems to be an ability to deal more effectively with difficult cases.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11587686     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(01)00699-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  31 in total

1.  A 10-step intraoperative surgical checklist (ISC) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy-can it really reduce conversion rates to open cholecystectomy?

Authors:  William B Robb; Gavin A Falk; John O Larkin; Ronan Waldron; Ronan P Waldron
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  [Typical intraoperative complications in laparoscopic surgery].

Authors:  F Köckerling; S Grund; D A Jacob
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection is achievable and offers advantages as a minimally invasive surgery over the open approach.

Authors:  Kinuko Nagayoshi; Takashi Ueki; Tatsuya Manabe; Taiki Moriyama; Kosuke Yanai; Yoshinao Oda; Masao Tanaka
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Conversions during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: risk factors and effects on patient outcome.

Authors:  Benjie Tang; Alfred Cuschieri
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 5.  [Simulation of laparoscopic surgery--four years' experience at the Department of Surgery of the University Hospital Marburg].

Authors:  Iyad Hassan; Thomas Osei-Agymang; Daniela Radu; Berthold Gerdes; Matthias Rothmund; Emilio Domínguez Fernández
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.704

6.  Recent experience with laparoscopic appendectomy in a Canadian teaching centre.

Authors:  Abdullah Ali; Michael A J Moser
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.089

7.  Experimental trial of transvaginal cholecystectomy: an ex vivo analysis of the learning process for a novel single-port technique.

Authors:  F C Becerra Garcia; M C Misra; H K Bhattacharjee; G Buess
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Caiwen Han; Xinyi Shan; Liang Yao; Peijing Yan; Meixuan Li; Lidong Hu; Hongwei Tian; Wutang Jing; Binbin Du; Lixia Wang; Kehu Yang; Tiankang Guo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Proficiency-gain curve for an advanced laparoscopic procedure defined by observation clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA).

Authors:  M Talebpour; A Alijani; G B Hanna; Z Moosa; B Tang; Alfred Cuschieri
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-23       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  [Surgical training using simulator. Virtual reality].

Authors:  K Maschuw; I Hassan; D K Bartsch
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 0.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.