Literature DB >> 16006945

Comparison of training modalities for performing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience with 1,000 patients.

Thomas Frede1, Tibet Erdogru, Derek Zukosky, Hakan Gulkesen, Dogu Teber, Jens Rassweiler.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We report a detailed analysis of different training modalities on the transferability of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy to generations of surgeons.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The first generation surgeon with experience with 600 cases and the second generation surgeon with 150 were trained in open retropubic radical prostatectomy and laparoscopy, whereas the third generation surgeon with 150 cases was trained only laparoscopically. The fourth generation of surgeons with a total of 50 cases was trained in our fellowship program. We analyzed groups of 50 operations. The groups were comparable with respect to patient age, prostate weight and pathological tumor stage.
RESULTS: We observed a continual decrease in operative time between (322 to 247 minutes.) and within (332 to 196 minutes.) the analyzed groups. This result was also expressed in a decrease in the time required for anastomosis. A significant decrease was observed for the initial transfusion rate (4% to 10%). No difference was found in the complication rate (ie conversion in 8% to 0% of cases). Pathological outcomes (ie positive margins for pT2/pT3) were comparable in the first 3 surgeon groups (14.9%, 14.2% and 22%, respectively) and available functional results (followup greater than 2 years) did not reveal any influence of the learning curve. A learning curve was observed only for overall operative time and the time required for anastomosis but it was shown to be significantly shorter for the following generations.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on a specific training program the personal level of education has a minor impact on the results and reproducibility of the laparoscopic radical prostatectomy technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16006945     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000165152.61295.cb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  10 in total

Review 1.  [Laparoscopic pelvic surgery: Where do we stand in the year 2006?].

Authors:  J Rassweiler; D Teber; J de la Rosette; P Laguna; V Pansodoro; T Frede
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Trocar-less instrumentation for laparoscopy: magnetic positioning of intra-abdominal camera and retractor.

Authors:  Sangtae Park; Richard A Bergs; Robert Eberhart; Linda Baker; Raul Fernandez; Jeffrey A Cadeddu
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  Learning curve in human laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Udaya Kumar; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Teaching laparoscopy to residents: how can we select good candidates?

Authors:  Miguel Ramirez-Backhaus; Giles Hellawell; Mafalda Melo; Ana Covita; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Analysis of three different vesicourethral anastomotic techniques in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Dogu Teber; Tibet Erdogru; Joanne Cresswell; Ali Serdar Gözen; Thomas Frede; Jens J Rassweiler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Development of urologic laparoscopy in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: a survey among urologists.

Authors:  Florian Imkamp; Thomas R W Herrmann; Jens U Stolzenburg; Jens Rassweiler; Tullio Sulser; Uwe Zimmermann; Sebastian Dziuba; Markus A Kuczyk; Martin Burchardt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Safe introduction of laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy in clinical practice: impact of a modular training program.

Authors:  Francesco Cantiello; Domenico Veneziano; Riccardo Bertolo; Antonio Cicione; Cristian Fiori; Riccardo Autorino; Rocco Damiano; Francesco Porpiglia
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-08-16       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Rectal tube or no rectal tube? A viewpoint from Duke University Medical Center.

Authors:  Sean A Pierre; David M Albala
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2008-05-06

9.  Evaluation of complications in endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy in a modular training programme: a multicentre experience.

Authors:  Roman Ganzer; Robert Rabenalt; Michael C Truss; Stefanos Papadoukakis; Minh Do; Andreas Blana; Markus Straub; Stefan Denzinger; Wolf F Wieland; Martin Burchardt; Thomas Herrmann; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  Learning curve using robotic surgery.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kaul; Nikhil L Shah; Mani Menon
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.862

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.