Purpose: To delineate the learning curve (LC) for laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) performed by residents according to seniority in training. Methods: Between October 2015 and November 2016, 150 patients underwent LA by three residents (in their first, second, and third year of training) under supervision. The patients were non-randomly assigned to each resident. The data were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively from prospectively collected database. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the three residents including operation time, complication, conversion, and so on. The LCs were evaluated by the moving average method and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) for operation time and surgical completion. Results: Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were similar except for age and location of the appendix among the three groups. Operation time was not different among the three residents (43.9, 45.3, and 48.4 min for A, B, and C, respectively). The moving average method for operation time showed a decreasing tendency for all residents. CUSUM for operation time showed that the peak points occurred at the 24th, 18th, and 31st cases for resident A, B, and C, respectively. In terms of surgical failure, residents A, B, and C reached steady states after the 35th, 11th, and 16th cases, respectively. Perforation of the appendix base was the only risk factor for surgical failure. Conclusion: The LC for LA by residents was 11-35 cases according to multidimensional statistical analyses. The accumulation of surgical experience of residents might affect the LC, especially for surgical completion rather than for operation time.
Purpose: To delineate the learning curve (LC) for laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) performed by residents according to seniority in training. Methods: Between October 2015 and November 2016, 150 patients underwent LA by three residents (in their first, second, and third year of training) under supervision. The patients were non-randomly assigned to each resident. The data were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively from prospectively collected database. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the three residents including operation time, complication, conversion, and so on. The LCs were evaluated by the moving average method and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) for operation time and surgical completion. Results: Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were similar except for age and location of the appendix among the three groups. Operation time was not different among the three residents (43.9, 45.3, and 48.4 min for A, B, and C, respectively). The moving average method for operation time showed a decreasing tendency for all residents. CUSUM for operation time showed that the peak points occurred at the 24th, 18th, and 31st cases for resident A, B, and C, respectively. In terms of surgical failure, residents A, B, and C reached steady states after the 35th, 11th, and 16th cases, respectively. Perforation of the appendix base was the only risk factor for surgical failure. Conclusion: The LC for LA by residents was 11-35 cases according to multidimensional statistical analyses. The accumulation of surgical experience of residents might affect the LC, especially for surgical completion rather than for operation time.