Literature DB >> 24055616

Successful incorporation of robotic surgery into gynecologic oncology fellowship training.

Pamela T Soliman1, David Iglesias, Mark F Munsell, Michael Frumovitz, Shannon N Westin, Alpa M Nick, Kathleen M Schmeler, Pedro T Ramirez.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The increasing role of robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology may impact fellowship training. The purpose of this study was to review the proportion of robotic procedures performed by fellows at the console, and compare operative times and lymph node yields to faculty surgeons.
METHODS: A prospective database of women undergoing robotic gynecologic surgery has been maintained since 2008. Intra-operative datasheets completed include surgical times and primary surgeon at the console. Operative times were compared between faculty and fellows for simple hysterectomy (SH), bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), pelvic (PLND) and paraaortic lymph node dissection (PALND) and vaginal cuff closure (VCC). Lymph nodes counts were also compared.
RESULTS: Times were recorded for 239 SH, 43 BSOs, 105 right PLNDs, 104 left PLNDs, 34 PALND and 269 VCC. Comparing 2008 to 2011, procedures performed by the fellow significantly increased; SH 16% to 83% (p<0.001), BSO 7% to 75% (p=0.005), right PLND 4% to 44% (p<0.001), left PLND 0% to 56% (p<0.001), and VCC 59% to 82% (p=0.024). Console times (min) were similar for SH (60 vs. 63, p=0.73), BSO (48 vs. 43, p=0.55), and VCC (20 vs. 22, p=0.26). Faculty times (min) were shorter for PLND (right 26 vs. 30, p=0.04, left 23 vs. 27, p=0.02). Nodal counts were not significantly different (right 7 vs. 8, p=0.17 or left 7 vs. 7, p=0.87).
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery can be successfully incorporated into gynecologic oncology fellowship training. With increased exposure to robotic surgery, fellows had similar operative times and lymph node yields as faculty surgeons.
© 2013.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fellowship training; Gynecologic cancers; Learning curve; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24055616      PMCID: PMC3856555          DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  13 in total

1.  Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology fellowship programs in the USA: a survey of fellows and fellowship directors.

Authors:  Gregory P Sfakianos; Peter J Frederick; James E Kendrick; J Michael Straughn; Larry C Kilgore; Warner K Huh
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 2.547

Review 2.  Safe introduction of new procedures and emerging technologies in surgery: education, credentialing, and privileging.

Authors:  Ajit K Sachdeva; Thomas R Russell
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 3.  The role of robotic surgery in gynecology.

Authors:  Arnold P Advincula; Arleen Song
Journal:  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.927

4.  A comparative study of 3 surgical methods for hysterectomy with staging for endometrial cancer: robotic assistance, laparoscopy, laparotomy.

Authors:  John F Boggess; Paola A Gehrig; Leigh Cantrell; Aaron Shafer; Mildred Ridgway; Elizabeth N Skinner; Wesley C Fowler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Robotic surgical training program in gynecology: how to train residents and fellows.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Geller; Kevin M Schuler; John F Boggess
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2011-01-22       Impact factor: 4.137

6.  Robotic approach for ovarian cancer: perioperative and survival results and comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy.

Authors:  Javier F Magrina; Vanna Zanagnolo; Brie N Noble; Rosanne M Kho; Paul Magtibay
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Radical hysterectomy: a comparison of surgical approaches after adoption of robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology.

Authors:  Pamela T Soliman; Michael Frumovitz; Charlotte C Sun; Ricardo Dos Reis; Kathleen M Schmeler; Alpa M Nick; Shannon N Westin; Jubilee Brown; Charles F Levenback; Pedro T Ramirez
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-08-27       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  John F Boggess; Paola A Gehrig; Leigh Cantrell; Aaron Shafer; Mildred Ridgway; Elizabeth N Skinner; Wesley C Fowler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience.

Authors:  Pedro T Ramirez; Brian M Slomovitz; Pamela T Soliman; Robert L Coleman; Charles Levenback
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic procedures in a fellowship training program.

Authors:  Paula S Lee; Amy Bland; Fidel A Valea; Laura J Havrilesky; Andrew Berchuck; Angeles Alvarez Secord
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  2 in total

1.  Make New Friends But Keep the Old: Minimally Invasive Surgery Training in Gynecologic Oncology Fellowship Programs.

Authors:  Kari L Ring; Pedro T Ramirez; Lesley B Conrad; William Burke; R Wendel Naumann; Mark F Munsell; Michael Frumovitz
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.437

2.  Pedagogic Approach in the Surgical Learning: The First Period of "Assistant Surgeon" May Improve the Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy.

Authors:  Angeline Favre; Stephanie Huberlant; Marie Carbonnel; Julie Goetgheluck; Aurelie Revaux; Jean Marc Ayoubi
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2016-11-02
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.