Literature DB >> 26294206

Assessing the learning curve of robotic sacrocolpopexy.

Brian J Linder1, Mallika Anand2, Amy L Weaver3, Joshua L Woelk2, Christopher J Klingele2, Emanuel C Trabuco2, John A Occhino2, John B Gebhart2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim was to evaluate the learning curve of robotic sacrocolpopexy, adjusted for surgical risk.
METHODS: The charts of 145 robotic sacrocolpopexies performed by urogynecologists at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA, from 2007 to 2013, were reviewed. Outcomes of interest included operative time, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or higher. Risk-adjusted cumulative summation analysis was performed by comparing a calculated complication risk score with observed patient outcomes, and then cumulatively recalculating the rate of expected vs observed complications after each procedure. Proficiency was defined as the point at which the surgeon's complication rates were better than expected, given the patient's risk factors.
RESULTS: The median operative time decreased significantly, from 5.3 to 3.6 h, during the 7-year period, and plateaued after the first 60 cases. A higher ASA classification was associated with an increased risk of intraoperative complications (p = 0.02), and a higher Charlson comorbidity index was associated with an increased risk of intraoperative or postoperative complications (p = 0.01). In risk-adjusted CUSUM analyses, accounting for these factors, and for body-mass index and vaginal parity, proficiency was identified at 55 cases for intraoperative complications and 84 cases for intraoperative or postoperative complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Operative time plateaued after the first 60 cases, whereas complication rates continued to decrease beyond this. Proficiency, as determined by a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis for complication rates, was achieved after approximately 84 cases. Evaluation of postoperative complications in addition to intraoperative complications, in a risk-adjusted model, is critical in depicting the surgical learning curve.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Learning curve; Robotic; Sacrocolpopexy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26294206     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-015-2816-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  24 in total

1.  Establishing learning curves for surgical residents using Cumulative Summation (CUSUM) Analysis.

Authors:  Amy Young; Joseph P Miller; Kenneth Azarow
Journal:  Curr Surg       Date:  2005 May-Jun

2.  Direct comparison of risk-adjusted and non-risk-adjusted CUSUM analyses of coronary artery bypass surgery outcomes.

Authors:  Richard J Novick; Stephanie A Fox; Larry W Stitt; Thomas L Forbes; Stefan Steiner
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; P Pompei; K L Ales; C R MacKenzie
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

4.  Analysis of robotic performance times to improve operative efficiency.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Geller; Feng-Chang Lin; Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 4.137

5.  Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve.

Authors:  Mohamed N Akl; Jaime B Long; Dobie L Giles; Jeffrey L Cornella; Paul D Pettit; Anita H Chen; Paul M Magtibay
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Richard K Lee; Alexandre Mottrie; Christopher K Payne; David Waltregny
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 7.  Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Ingrid E Nygaard; Rebecca McCreery; Linda Brubaker; AnnaMarie Connolly; Geoff Cundiff; Anne M Weber; Halina Zyczynski
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for female genital organ prolapse: establishment of a learning curve.

Authors:  Cherif Y Akladios; Daphné Dautun; Christian Saussine; Jean Jaques Baldauf; Carole Mathelin; Arnaud Wattiez
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 2.435

9.  The learning curve of robotic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Joshua L Woelk; Elizabeth R Casiano; Amy L Weaver; Bobbie S Gostout; Emanuel C Trabuco; John B Gebhart
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Complications in robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery according to case type: a 6-year retrospective cohort study using Clavien-Dindo classification.

Authors:  Mary Ellen Wechter; Jasmine Mohd; Javier F Magrina; Jeffrey L Cornella; Paul M Magtibay; Jeffrey R Wilson; Rosanne M Kho
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 4.137

View more
  8 in total

1.  A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.

Authors:  I Kassite; T Bejan-Angoulvant; H Lardy; A Binet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy: How to Avoid Short- and Long-Term Complications.

Authors:  Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  A Novel, Structured Fellow Training Pathway for Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Tatiana Catanzarite; Jasmine Tan-Kim; John N Nguyen; Sharon Jakus-Waldman; Shawn A Menefee
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2021-05-26

4.  A live porcine model for robotic sacrocolpopexy training.

Authors:  Khushabu Kasabwala; Ramy Goueli; Patrick J Culligan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Perioperative Complications and Cost of Vaginal, Open Abdominal, and Robotic Surgery for Apical Vaginal Vault Prolapse.

Authors:  Mallika Anand; Amy L Weaver; Kristin M Fruth; Bijan J Borah; Christopher J Klingele; John B Gebhart
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 2.091

6.  The impact of fellowship surgical training on operative time and patient morbidity during robotics-assisted sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Charelle M Carter-Brooks; Angela L Du; Michael J Bonidie; Jonathan P Shepherd
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Describing the learning curve for bulbar urethroplasty.

Authors:  Marco Spilotros; Sachin Malde; Tamsin J Greenwell
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-12

Review 8.  Systematic review of learning curves in robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  N A Soomro; D A Hashimoto; A J Porteous; C J A Ridley; W J Marsh; R Ditto; S Roy
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2019-11-29
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.