Yuman Fong1, Joseph F Buell2, Justin Collins3, John Martinie4, Christiane Bruns5, Allan Tsung6, Pierre-Alain Clavien7, Ido Nachmany8, Bjørn Edwin9, Johann Pratschke10, Evgeny Solomonov11, Alfred Koenigsrainer12, Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti13. 1. Department of Surgery, City of Hope Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91011, USA. yfong@coh.org. 2. Department of Surgery, Mission Healthcare, HCA Healthcare, North Carolina Division, MAHEC University of North Carolina, Asheville, NC, USA. 3. Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Department of General Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA. 5. Department of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 6. Department of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA. 7. Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 8. Department of "Surgery B". Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv & The Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 9. The Intervention Centre and Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway. 10. Department of Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 11. Department of General and Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Ziv Medical Centre, Zefat (Safed), Israel. 12. Department of General, Visceral, Cancer and Surgery, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. 13. Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) procedures are performed worldwide and establishing processes for safe adoption of this technology is essential for patient benefit. We report results of the Delphi process to define and optimize robotic training procedures for HPB surgeons. METHODS: In 2019, a robotic HPB surgery panel with an interest in surgical training from the Americas and Europe was created and met. An e-consensus-finding exercise using the Delphi process was applied and consensus was defined as 80% agreement on each question. Iterations of anonymous voting continued over three rounds. RESULTS: Members agreed on several points: there was need for a standardized robotic training curriculum for HPB surgery that considers experience of surgeons and based on a robotic hepatectomy includes a common approach for "basic robotic skills" training (e-learning module, including hardware description, patient selection, port placement, docking, troubleshooting, fundamentals of robotic surgery, team training and efficiency, and emergencies) and an "advanced technical skills curriculum" (e-learning, including patient selection information, cognitive skills, and recommended operative equipment lists). A modular approach to index procedures should be used with video demonstrations, port placement for index procedure, troubleshooting, and emergency scenario management information. Inexperienced surgeons should undergo training in basic robotic skills and console proficiency, transitioning to full procedure training of e-learning (video demonstration, simulation training, case observation, and final evaluation). Experienced surgeons should undergo basic training when using a new system (e-learning, dry lab, and operating room (OR) team training, virtual reality modules, and wet lab; case observations were unnecessary for basic training) and should complete the advanced index procedural robotic curriculum with assessment by wet lab, case observation, and OR team training. CONCLUSIONS: Optimization and standardization of training and education of HPB surgeons in robotic procedures was agreed upon. Results are being incorporated into future curriculum for education in robotic surgery.
BACKGROUND: Robotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) procedures are performed worldwide and establishing processes for safe adoption of this technology is essential for patient benefit. We report results of the Delphi process to define and optimize robotic training procedures for HPB surgeons. METHODS: In 2019, a robotic HPB surgery panel with an interest in surgical training from the Americas and Europe was created and met. An e-consensus-finding exercise using the Delphi process was applied and consensus was defined as 80% agreement on each question. Iterations of anonymous voting continued over three rounds. RESULTS: Members agreed on several points: there was need for a standardized robotic training curriculum for HPB surgery that considers experience of surgeons and based on a robotic hepatectomy includes a common approach for "basic robotic skills" training (e-learning module, including hardware description, patient selection, port placement, docking, troubleshooting, fundamentals of robotic surgery, team training and efficiency, and emergencies) and an "advanced technical skills curriculum" (e-learning, including patient selection information, cognitive skills, and recommended operative equipment lists). A modular approach to index procedures should be used with video demonstrations, port placement for index procedure, troubleshooting, and emergency scenario management information. Inexperienced surgeons should undergo training in basic robotic skills and console proficiency, transitioning to full procedure training of e-learning (video demonstration, simulation training, case observation, and final evaluation). Experienced surgeons should undergo basic training when using a new system (e-learning, dry lab, and operating room (OR) team training, virtual reality modules, and wet lab; case observations were unnecessary for basic training) and should complete the advanced index procedural robotic curriculum with assessment by wet lab, case observation, and OR team training. CONCLUSIONS: Optimization and standardization of training and education of HPB surgeons in robotic procedures was agreed upon. Results are being incorporated into future curriculum for education in robotic surgery.
Authors: Peter Hertz; Kim Houlind; Jan Jepsen; Lars Bundgaard; Pernille Jensen; Mikkel Friis; Lars Konge; Flemming Bjerrum Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-10-27 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Alexander Urbanski; Benjamin Babic; Wolfgang Schröder; Lars Schiffmann; Dolores T Müller; Christiane J Bruns; Hans F Fuchs Journal: Chirurg Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: Jessica Stockheim; Mihailo Andric; Sara Acciuffi; Sara Al-Madhi; Mirhasan Rahimli; Maximilian Dölling; Gernot Geginat; Aristotelis Perrakis; Roland S Croner Journal: Chirurgie (Heidelb) Date: 2022-07-12