EANS Basic Brain Course (ABC): combining simulation to cadaver lab for a new concept of neurosurgical training

Strategies to improve surgical technical competency: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A cornerstone of surgical residency training is an educational program that produces highly skilled and effective surgeons. Training structures are constantly being revised due to evolving program structures, shifting workforces, and variability in the clinical environment. This has resulted in significant heterogeneity in all surgical resident education, training tools utilized, and measures of training efficacy.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed educational interventions for technical skills in neurosurgery published across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science over four decades. We extracted general characteristics of each surgical training tool while categorizing educational interventions by modality and neurosurgical application.

RESULTS

We identified 626 studies which developed surgical training tools across eight different training modalities: textbooks and literature (11), online resources (53), didactic teaching and one-on-one instruction (7), laboratory courses (50), cadaveric models (63), animal models (47), mixed reality (166), and physical models (229). While publication volume has grown exponentially, a majority of studies were cited with relatively low frequency. Most training programs were published in the development and validation phase with only 2.1% of tools implemented long-term. Each training modality expressed unique strengths and limitations, with limited data reported on the educational impact connected to each training tool.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous surgical training tools have been developed and implemented across residency training programs. Though many creative and cutting-edge tools have been devised, evidence supporting educational efficacy and long-term application is lacking. Increased utilization of novel surgical training tools will require validation of metrics used to assess the training outcomes and optimized integration with clinical practice.

Through the orbit and beyond: Current state and future perspectives in endoscopic orbital surgery on behalf of the EANS frontiers committee in orbital tumors and the EANS skull base section

Introduction

Orbital surgery has always been disputed among specialists, mainly neurosurgeons, otorhinolaryngologists, maxillofacial surgeons and ophthalmologists. The orbit is a borderland between intra- and extracranial compartments; Krönlein's lateral orbitotomy and the orbitozygomatic infratemporal approach are the historical milestones of modern orbital-cranial surgery.

Research question

Since its first implementation, endoscopy has significantly impacted neurosurgery, changing perspectives and approaches to the skull base. Since its first application in 2009, transorbital endoscopic surgery opened the way for new surgical scenario, previously feasible only with extensive tissue dissection.

Material and methods

A PRISMA based literature search was performed to select the most relevant papers on the topic.

Results

Here, we provide a narrative review on the current state and future trends in endoscopic orbital surgery.

Discussion and conclusion

This manuscript is a joint effort of the EANS frontiers committee in orbital tumors and the EANS skull base section.

A Brief Explanation on Surgical Approaches for Treatment of Different Brain Tumors

The main goal of brain tumor surgery is to achieve gross total tumor resection without postoperative complications and permanent new deficits. However, when the lesion is located close or within eloquent brain areas, cranial nerves, and/or major brain vessels, it is imperative to balance the extent of resection with the risk of harming the patient, by following a so-called maximal safe resection philosophy. This view implies a shift from an approach-guided attitude, in which few standard surgical approaches are used to treat almost all intracranial tumors, to a pathology-guided one, with surgical approaches actually tailored to the specific tumor that has to be treated with specific dedicated pre- and intraoperative tools and techniques. In this chapter, the basic principles of the most commonly used neurosurgical approaches in brain tumors surgery are presented and discussed along with an overview on all available modern tools able to improve intraoperative visualization, extent of resection, and postoperative clinical outcome.

Virtual-Augmented Reality and Life-Like Neurosurgical Simulator for Training: First Evaluation of a Hands-On Experience for Residents

Background

In the recent years, growing interest in simulation-based surgical education has led to various practical alternatives for medical training. More recently, courses based on virtual reality (VR) and three-dimensional (3D)-printed models are available. In this paper, a hybrid (virtual and physical) neurosurgical simulator has been validated, equipped with augmented reality (AR) capabilities that can be used repeatedly to increase familiarity and improve the technical skills in human brain anatomy and neurosurgical approaches.

Methods

The neurosurgical simulator used in this study (UpSurgeOn Box, UpSurgeOn Srl, Assago, Milan) combines a virtual component and a physical component with an intermediate step to provide a hybrid solution. A first reported and evaluated practical experience on the anatomical 3D-printed model has been conducted with a total of 30 residents in neurosurgery. The residents had the possibility to choose a specific approach, focus on the correct patient positioning, and go over the chosen approach step-by-step, interacting with the model through AR application. Next, each practical surgical step on the 3D model was timed and qualitatively evaluated by 3 senior neurosurgeons. Quality and usability-grade surveys were filled out by participants.

Results

More than 89% of the residents assessed that the application and the AR simulator were very helpful in improving the orientation skills during neurosurgical approaches. Indeed, 89.3% of participants found brain and skull anatomy highly realistic during their tasks. Moreover, workshop exercises were considered useful in increasing the competency and technical skills required in the operating room by 85.8 and 84.7% of residents, respectively. Data collected confirmed that the anatomical model and its application were intuitive, well-integrated, and easy to use.

Conclusion

The hybrid AR and 3D-printed neurosurgical simulator could be a valid tool for neurosurgical training, capable of enhancing personal technical skills and competence. In addition, it could be easy to imagine how patient safety would increase and healthcare costs would be reduced, even if more studies are needed to investigate these aspects. The integration of simulators for training in neurosurgery as preparatory steps for the operating room should be recommended and further investigated given their huge potential.

Evaluation of the precision of operative augmented reality compared to standard neuronavigation using a 3D-printed skull

OBJECTIVE

Augmented reality (AR) in cranial surgery allows direct projection of preregistered overlaid images in real time on the microscope surgical field. In this study, the authors aimed to compare the precision of AR-assisted navigation and standard pointer-based neuronavigation (NV) by using a 3D-printed skull in surgical conditions.

METHODS

A commercial standardized 3D-printed skull was scanned, fused, and referenced with an MR image and a CT scan of a patient with a 2 × 2-mm right frontal sinus defect. The defect was identified, registered, and integrated into NV. The target was physically marked on the 3D-printed skull replicating the right frontal sinus defect. Twenty-six subjects participated, 25 of whom had no prior NV or AR experience and 1 with little AR experience. The subjects were briefly trained in how to use NV, AR, and AR recalibration tools. Participants were asked to do the following: 1) "target the center of the defect in the 3D-printed skull with a navigation pointer, assisted only by NV orientation," and 2) "use the surgical microscope and AR to focus on the center of the projected object" under conventional surgical conditions. For the AR task, the number of recalibrations was recorded. Confidence regarding NV and AR precision were assessed prior to and after the experiment by using a 9-level Likert scale.

RESULTS

The median distance to target was statistically lower for AR than for NV (1 mm [Q1: 1 mm, Q3: 2 mm] vs 3 mm [Q1: 2 mm, Q3: 4 mm] [p < 0.001]). In the AR task, the median number of recalibrations was 4 (Q1: 4, Q3: 4.75). The number of recalibrations was significantly correlated with the precision (Spearman rho: -0.71, p < 0.05). The trust assessment after performing the experiment scored a median of 8 for AR and 5.5 for NV (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows for the first time the superiority of AR over NV in terms of precision. AR is easy to use. The number of recalibrations performed using reference structures increases the precision of the navigation. The confidence regarding precision increases with experience.

The evolution of an SBNS-accredited NANSIG simulated skills workshop for aspiring neurosurgical trainees: an analysis of qualitative and quantitative data

Background

The Neurology and Neurosurgery Interest Group (NANSIG) neurosurgical skills workshop is novel in teaching neurosurgical skills solely to medical students and foundation trainees in the UK. The aim is to offer an affordable option for a high-fidelity simulation course enabling students to learn and practise specific neurosurgical skills in a safe, supervised environment.

Methods

A 10-delegate cohort was quantitatively assessed at the NANSIG neurosurgical skills workshop. Two assessors used a novel modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (mOSATS) assessment tool, comprising 5 domains ranked according to a 5-point scale to rate delegates’ ability to create a burr hole. Qualitative data from previous workshops were collected, consisting of open-ended, closed-ended and 5-point Likert scale responses to pre- and post-workshop questionnaires. Data were analysed using SPSS® software.

Results

Delegates scored a mean total of 62.1% (21.75/35) and 85.1% (29.8/35) in pre- and post-workshop assessments respectively revealing a statistically significant improvement. Regarding percentage of improvement, no significant difference was shown amongst candidates when comparing the number of neurosurgical cases observed and/or assisted in the past. There was no significant difference in the overall rating between the last two workshops (4.89 and 4.8 out of 5, respectively). One hundred percent of the attendees reported feeling more confident in assisting in theatre after the last two workshops.

Conclusion

We show that a simulation workshop cannot only objectively quantify the improvement of surgical skill acquisition but can also be beneficial regardless of the extent of prior experience.

The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The use of simulation in surgical training is ever growing. Evidence suggests such training may have beneficial clinically relevant effects. The objective of this research is to investigate the effects of surgical simulation training on clinically relevant patient outcomes by evaluating randomized controlled trials (RCT). PubMed was searched using PRISMA guidelines: "surgery" [All Fields] AND "simulation" [All Fields] AND "patient outcome" [All Fields]. Of 119 papers identified, 100 were excluded for various reasons. Meta-analyses were conducted using the inverse-variance random-effects method. Nineteen papers were reviewed using the CASP RCT Checklist. Sixteen studies looked at surgical training, two studies assessed patient-specific simulator practice, and one paper focused on warming-up on a simulator before performing surgery. Median study population size was 22 (range 3-73). Most articles reported outcome measures such as post-intervention Global Rating Scale (GRS) score and/or operative time. On average, the intervention group scored 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.71, P = 0.005) points higher on a standardized GRS scale of 1-10. On average, the intervention group was 44% (1% to 87%, P = 0.04) faster than the control group. Four papers assessed the impact of simulation training on patient outcomes, with only one finding a significant effect. We found a significant effect of simulation training on operative performance as assessed by GRS, albeit a small one, as well as a significant reduction to operative time. However, there is to date scant evidence from RCTs to suggest a significant effect of surgical simulation training on patient outcomes.