A Bellier1,2, A Chanet3, P Belingheri3, P Chaffanjon3,4. 1. Department of Medical Evaluation, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Boulevard de la Chantourne, 38700, La Tronche, France. abellier@chu-grenoble.fr. 2. Laboratoire d'Anatomie Des Alpes Françaises, Faculty of Medicine, Grenoble Alpes University, Place du commandant Nal, Domaine de La Merci, 38700, La Tronche Cedex, France. abellier@chu-grenoble.fr. 3. Laboratoire d'Anatomie Des Alpes Françaises, Faculty of Medicine, Grenoble Alpes University, Place du commandant Nal, Domaine de La Merci, 38700, La Tronche Cedex, France. 4. GIPSA-Lab, Dpt. Parole et Cognition, UMR 5216, Grenoble Campus, 11 rue des Mathématiques, BP46, 38402, Saint Martin d'Hères Cedex, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to identify the most appropriate cadaver perfusion techniques for surgical training through a systematic review with a description of the protocols used. METHODS: The search strategy included PubMed and reference tracking. Studies were identified by searching the electronic Medline databases. The search concepts included perfusion, cadavers and simulation training, and the protocol used is reported. This resulted in a qualitative review of 12 articles out of 250 articles consulted. We collected all the important data from these 12 articles. RESULTS: Regarding the characteristics of the studies and the declotting or perfusion techniques, the results were heterogeneous. Indeed, in several studies, a good deal of information was unclear or insufficiently precise, making it unfeasible to summarize the data. The methods used were not sufficiently explicit and detailed. However, a majority of the fresh cadavers used tap water for declotting. Perfusion, type of fluid, number of pumps, pressure, pulsatility, and arterial or venous approaches differed greatly. Only two studies fulfilled five of our six realism criteria for surgical simulation. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provided an overview of all the different cadaver perfusion techniques. It could be used to establish a reference method of a simulation model.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to identify the most appropriate cadaver perfusion techniques for surgical training through a systematic review with a description of the protocols used. METHODS: The search strategy included PubMed and reference tracking. Studies were identified by searching the electronic Medline databases. The search concepts included perfusion, cadavers and simulation training, and the protocol used is reported. This resulted in a qualitative review of 12 articles out of 250 articles consulted. We collected all the important data from these 12 articles. RESULTS: Regarding the characteristics of the studies and the declotting or perfusion techniques, the results were heterogeneous. Indeed, in several studies, a good deal of information was unclear or insufficiently precise, making it unfeasible to summarize the data. The methods used were not sufficiently explicit and detailed. However, a majority of the fresh cadavers used tap water for declotting. Perfusion, type of fluid, number of pumps, pressure, pulsatility, and arterial or venous approaches differed greatly. Only two studies fulfilled five of our six realism criteria for surgical simulation. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provided an overview of all the different cadaver perfusion techniques. It could be used to establish a reference method of a simulation model.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cadavers; Perfusion; Revascularization; Simulation; Surgical training
Authors: Diane E S Payne; Adam M Kaufman; Robert W Wysocki; Marc J Richard; David S Ruch; Fraser J Leversedge Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Antonio Rampazzo; Joseph Edward Kutz; Christina Kaufman; Yorell Manon-Matos; Linda Bright; Francis Anthony Papay; Bahar Bassiri Gharb Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Stephen Varga; Jennifer Smith; Michael Minneti; Joseph Carey; Scott Zakaluzny; Thomas Noguchi; Demetrios Demetriades; Peep Talving Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2014-08-14 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Savino Spadaro; Dan Stieper Karbing; Alberto Fogagnolo; Riccardo Ragazzi; Francesco Mojoli; Luca Astolfi; Antonio Gioia; Elisabetta Marangoni; Stephen Edward Rees; Carlo Alberto Volta Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: Whitney C McFadden; Hadley Walsh; Felix Richter; Céline Soudant; Clare H Bryce; Patrick R Hof; Mary Fowkes; John F Crary; Andrew T McKenzie Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 7.801