Development of biotissue training models for anastomotic suturing in pancreatic surgery

Use of a zipline skin closure device in gastroenterological surgery: a multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing wound infection incidence, operation time, and cosmesis

Subcuticular sutures, which are effective and cosmetically advantageous in gastroenterological surgery, are time-consuming and heavily dependent on the surgeon's technical expertise. This study aims to evaluate whether Zipline skin closure could be an alternative to subcuticular sutures in gastroenterological surgery. A multicenter randomized controlled trial (UMIN000048169) was conducted on 76 patients who underwent elective gastroenterological surgery. The patients were randomized to either the Zipline group (N = 35) or the subcuticular suture group (N = 41). Primary outcomes included skin closure time and secondary outcomes included postoperative wound complications and cosmetic results, assessed 6 months post-surgery, using the Stony Book Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES). The Zipline group demonstrated significantly shorter closure times than the suture group (median: 438 s [406-526] vs. 575 s [537-638]; p = 0.003). This difference was more pronounced for incisions > 55 mm (median:399 s [307-533] vs. 605 s [493-736]; p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed in wound infection rates (5.7% vs. 2.4%; p = 0.46) or SBSES scores (median: 4.0 [4.0-5.0] vs. 4.0 [3.0-5.0; p = 0.82) between the two groups. The Zipline device reduced the skin closure time in gastroenterological surgery significantly, particularly for large incisions, without compromising wound healing or cosmetic outcomes. These findings suggest that the Zipline system may be a viable alternative to traditional subcuticular sutures in gastroenterological procedures, potentially promoting operating room efficiency without compromising surgical quality or patient outcomes.

Residency robotic biotissue curriculum: the next frontier in robotic surgical training

INTRODUCTION

Virtual reality has been shown to be a strong introduction to the robot. However, we hypothesized that a biotissue curriculum including common surgical anastomoses can further enhance robotic technical skills in surgical residents.

METHODS

Post-graduate-year three (PGY-3) general surgery residents completed a two-week robotic simulation rotation. The inanimate exercises used biotissue to simulate common robotic anastomoses, including the running hepaticojejunostomy (RHJ), gastrojejunostomy (GJ), interrupted hepaticojejunostomy (IHJ), and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). Drills were timed and graded according to modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS; range 6-30).

RESULTS

32 residents completed the curriculum. 81.3% of residents reported prior experience at the surgeon console (median=5 operations). Across all drills the average time to completion decreased from first to fourth attempt (RHJ: 33.7±8.9 vs. 26.3±8.1 min, p<0.001; GJ: 57.2±15.1 vs. 44.6±9.5 min, p<0.001; IHJ: 32.6±7.2 vs. 27.1±7.7 min, p<0.001; PJ: 44.2±9.3 vs. 35.6±10.5 min, p<0.001). Average OSATS score increased across all drills as well (RHJ: 16.0±3.8 vs. 23.3±3.4, p<0.001; GJ: 19.4±2.1 vs. 26.0±2.5, p<0.001; IHJ: 16.9±2.7 vs. 23.2±3.6, p<0.001, PJ: 17.9±2.6 vs. 23.6±3.6, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The robotic biotissue curriculum improves resident performance on robotic anastomoses. With the rise of the robotic platform, training in robotic procedures should be incorporated during surgical residency.

Surgical training simulation modalities in minimally invasive surgery: How to achieve evidence-based curricula by translational research

BACKGROUND

Surgery has evolved from a hands-on discipline where skills were acquired via the "learning by doing" principle to a surgical science with attention to patient safety, health care effectiveness and evidence-based research. A variety of simulation modalities have been developed to meet the need for effective resident training. So far, research regarding surgical training for minimally invasive surgery has been extensive but also heterogenous in grade of evidence.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted to summarize current knowledge about simulation training and to guide research towards evidence-based curricula with translational effects. This was conducted using a variety of terms in PubMed for English articles up to October 2024. Results are presented in a structured narrative review.

RESULTS

For virtual reality simulators, there is sound evidence for effective training outcomes. The required instruments for the development of minimally invasive surgery curricula combining different simulation modalities to create a clinical benefit are known and published.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons are the main creators for minimally invasive surgery training curricula and often follow a hands-on oriented approach that leaves out equally important aspects of assessment, evaluation, and feedback. Further high-quality research that includes available evidence in this field promises to improve patient safety in surgical disciplines.

Scoping review and proposed curriculum for robotic hepatopancreatobiliary surgery training

BACKGROUND

HPB surgery is being increasingly performed robotically worldwide. However, there is no consensus on what constitutes adequate training or an established curriculum. We evaluate the existing literature on formal education in robotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery and propose a curriculum using Kern's six-step curriculum development model.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed across major databases and the methodology of the Joanna Briggs Institute was followed. The PRISMA-ScR was conformed in reporting. Evidence pertaining to cholecystectomy alone was excluded and studies that described formal training pathways were included.

RESULTS

Fifteen curricula were included with predilection towards the pancreas (n = 7, liver: n = 5, combination: n = 3). Almost all studies proposed initial robot system training through online modules, observership and console simulation exercises. Following this, six curricula described procedure-specific anastomosis training. Almost all studies described mentorship and proctorship. The assessment for implementation commonly described includes objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) and cumulative sum technique (CUSUM) for operation time, conversion-to-open rate and postoperative complications.

DISCUSSION

This study has summarised the formal curricula for learning robotic HPB surgery. The majority share similar implementation tools. A comprehensive curriculum based on validated educational principles has been proposed which incorporates these elements.

Robotic hepaticojejunostomy training in novices using robotic simulation and dry-lab suturing (ROSIM): randomized controlled crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Robotic suturing training is in increasing demand and can be done using suture-pads or robotic simulation training. Robotic simulation is less cumbersome, whereas a robotic suture-pad approach could be more effective but is more costly. A training curriculum with crossover between both approaches may be a practical solution. However, studies assessing the impact of starting with robotic simulation or suture-pads in robotic suturing training are lacking.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled crossover trial conducted with 20 robotic novices from 3 countries who underwent robotic suturing training using an Intuitive Surgical® X and Xi system with the SimNow (robotic simulation) and suture-pads (dry-lab). Participants were randomized to start with robotic simulation (intervention group, n = 10) or suture-pads (control group, n = 10). After the first and second training, all participants completed a robotic hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) in biotissue. Primary endpoint was the objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) score during HJ, scored by two blinded raters. Secondary endpoints were force measurements and a qualitative analysis. After training, participants were surveyed regarding their preferences.

RESULTS

Overall, 20 robotic novices completed both training sessions and performed 40 robotic HJs. After both trainings, OSATS was scored higher in the robotic simulation-first group (3.3 ± 0.9 vs 2.5 ± 0.8; p = 0.049), whereas the median maximum force (N) (5.0 [3.2-8.0] vs 3.8 [2.3-12.8]; p = 0.739) did not differ significantly between the groups. In the survey, 17/20 (85%) participants recommended to include robotic simulation training, 14/20 (70%) participants preferred to start with robotic simulation, and 20/20 (100%) to include suture-pad training.

CONCLUSION

Surgical performance during robotic HJ in robotic novices was significantly better after robotic simulation-first training followed by suture-pad training. A robotic suturing curriculum including both robotic simulation and dry-lab suturing should ideally start with robotic simulation.

[Robotic pancreatic surgery]

Robotic operations as a further development of conventional laparoscopic surgery have been introduced for nearly all interventions in visceral surgery during the last decade. They also currently have a high importance and acceptance in pancreatic surgery despite a relevant learning curve and high associated costs. Standard procedures, such as robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and partial pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) are most frequently performed, whereas extended resections, e.g., vascular reconstructions of the portal vein, are still limited to a small number of centers worldwide. Potential advantages of robotic pancreatic surgery compared to open surgery include, in particular, less blood loss and a faster postoperative recovery of the patients leading to a shorter hospital stay. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robotic approaches offer advantages with respect to better visualization and three-dimensional dexterity of the instruments; however, the currently published literature comprises only retrospective or prospective observational studies and randomized controlled results are not yet available but first study results in this respect are expected within the next 2-3 years.

[Evidence, Availability and Future Visions in Simulation in General and Visceral Surgery]

Practice makes perfect - a saying that everyone has certainly heard. Surgeons of all levels of training can demonstrably practice to some extent on simulators. This training outside the operating theatre and independent of patients makes sense, both ethically and financially. Although the effectiveness of simulation in surgery has been proven several times, simulation training is not a mandatory part of surgical specialist training in Germany. Simulation covers a very wide range in terms of application, effort and costs. This review is intended to give an overview of the systems and their areas of application and the target group. The focus lies on the commonly available systems and possible advantages and disadvantages. Practical skills are in the foreground and all three pillars of general and visceral surgery - conventional techniques, laparoscopy and robotics - are taken into account. However, simulators alone do not achieve cost-benefit effectiveness. The full potential of such an investment can only be exploited with a site-specific, structured training concept in which simulation training according to the post-graduate year and appropriate allocation to surgeries in the operating room are closely interlinked. It should always be possible to train basic skills on site. The significant additional costs for complex simulation systems are possible, depending on the financial resources, or should be purchased in a network or for national courses. The techniques of immersive virtual reality in combination with artificial intelligence and deformation algorithms will certainly play a decisive role for the future of simulation, whereby the use of the available systems must be a primary goal. The integration of simulation into specialist training should be striven for, not least in order to justify the costs.