Literature DB >> 27039192

The role of the assistant during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: does experience matter?

Aaron M Potretzke1, Brent A Knight2, John A Brockman2, Joel Vetter2, Robert S Figenshau2, Sam B Bhayani2, Brian M Benway3.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes with respect to the experience level of the bedside assistant during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively maintained database of 414 consecutive robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomies performed by experienced robotic surgeons at our institution from April 2011 to September 2014. A senior-level assistant was defined as a resident in his or her post-graduate year (PGY) 4 or 5, or a fellow. Junior-level assistants were considered to be PGY-2, PGY-3, or a nurse first assistant. Multivariate analyses were performed using linear, Poisson, and logistic regression models. There were 115 junior-level cases and 299 senior-level cases. On univariate analysis, the experience level of the assistant had no impact on operative time (168 for junior level vs. 163 min for senior level, p = 0.656). Likewise, there were no differences between the junior- and senior-level groups with regard to warm ischemia time (21.3 vs. 20.9 min, p = 0.843), negative margin status (111/115 (96.5 %) vs. 280/299 (93.6 %), p = 0.340), or postoperative complications (17/115 (14.8 %) vs. 35/299 (11.7 %), p = 0.408). After multivariate analysis, operative time was associated with increased body mass index and tumor size (both p < 0.001), but not with resident experience level (p = 0.051). Estimated blood loss and postoperative complications were also not associated with the PGY of the assistant (p = 0.488 and p = 0.916, respectively). Despite common concern, the PGY status of a physician trainee serving as the bedside assistant does not appear to influence the outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy at a high-volume center.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Neoplasm; Nephrectomy; Partial nephrectomy; Postoperative complications; Robotics

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27039192     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-016-0582-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  26 in total

1.  Robotic repair of access-related aortic injuries: unexpected complication of robot-assisted prostatectomy.

Authors:  Benjamin Gibson; Ronney Abaza
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  [Athermal robotic technique of radical prostatectomy: an assistant's perspective].

Authors:  Anil Mandhani; Ash K Tewari; Roy Berryhill
Journal:  Arch Esp Urol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 0.436

3.  Resident involvement and experience do not affect perioperative complications following robotic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Daniel T McMillan; Anthony J Viera; Jonathan Matthews; Mathew C Raynor; Michael E Woods; Raj S Pruthi; Eric M Wallen; Matthew E Nielsen; Angela B Smith
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  The impact of resident involvement in minimally-invasive urologic oncology procedures.

Authors:  Nedim Ruhotina; Julien Dagenais; Giorgio Gandaglia; Akshay Sood; Firas Abdollah; Steven L Chang; Jeffrey J Leow; Kola Olugbade; Arun Rai; Jesse D Sammon; Marianne Schmid; Briony Varda; Kevin C Zorn; Mani Menon; Adam S Kibel; Quoc-Dien Trinh
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Simulation-based training for bedside assistants can benefit experienced robotic prostatectomy teams.

Authors:  David D Thiel; Amy Lannen; Eugene Richie; Jesse Dove; Nikunj M Gajarawala; Todd C Igel
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  Lost needle: a dilemma in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  M A Omar; A Davidson; O M A Karim
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-10-14

7.  Rising incidence of small renal masses: a need to reassess treatment effect.

Authors:  John M Hollingsworth; David C Miller; Stephanie Daignault; Brent K Hollenbeck
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-20       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Renal function after nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy: results from EORTC randomized trial 30904.

Authors:  Emil Scosyrev; Edward M Messing; Richard Sylvester; Steven Campbell; Hendrik Van Poppel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  National trends in the utilization of partial nephrectomy before and after the establishment of AUA guidelines for the management of renal masses.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Dawn Walter; Glen B Taksler; William C Huang; James S Wysock; Ganesh Sivarajan; Stacy Loeb; Samir S Taneja; Danil V Makarov
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Trends in renal surgery: robotic technology is associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Hiten D Patel; Jeffrey K Mullins; Phillip M Pierorazio; Gautam Jayram; Jason E Cohen; Brian R Matlaga; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  9 in total

1.  Re: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assistant's seniority has no influence on perioperative course.

Authors:  Igor Sorokin; Jessica Nelson; Noah E Canvasser
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-09

2.  Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): tips and tricks from the bedside assistant view-expert experiences.

Authors:  S van der Horst; C Voli; I A Polanco; R van Hillegersberg; J P Ruurda; B Park; D Molena
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 3.429

3.  Robotic cardiac surgery impact of a new patient-side assistant on outcomes.

Authors:  Mackenzie McCrorey; Hiroto Kitahara; Dorothy Krienbring; Brooke Patel; Sarah Nisivaco; Husam H Balkhy
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2019-06-25

4.  Implementation of a standardized robotic assistant surgical training curriculum.

Authors:  Jill M Collins; Danielle S Walsh; John Hudson; Shakira Henderson; Julie Thompson; Michael Zychowicz
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-08-26

5.  Does the experience of the bedside assistant effect the results of robotic surgeons in the learning curve of robot assisted radical prostatectomy?

Authors:  Haci Ibrahim Cimen; Yavuz Tarik Atik; Serkan Altinova; Oztug Adsan; Mevlana Derya Balbay
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2019 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

6.  Three Different Learning Curves Have an Independent Impact on Perioperative Outcomes After Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparative Analysis.

Authors:  Philip Zeuschner; Irmengard Meyer; Stefan Siemer; Michael Stoeckle; Gudrun Wagenpfeil; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Matthias Saar; Martin Janssen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Role and Training of the Bedside Surgeon in Robotic Surgery: A Survey Among French Urologists-in-Training.

Authors:  Francois Lagrange; Gaelle Fiard; Clement Larose; Pascal Eschwege; Jacques Hubert
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2022-01-18

8.  Experienced bedside-assistants improve operative outcomes for surgeons early in their learning curve for robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Alaina Garbens; Aaron H Lay; Ryan L Steinberg; Jeffrey C Gahan
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-10-01

9.  ASO Author Reflection: Learning Curves in Robotic Partial Nephrectomy-Not Only the Surgeon Counts.

Authors:  Philip Zeuschner; Matthias Saar; Martin Janssen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 5.344

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.