1
|
Sigg S, Afferi L, Lehner F, Dugas S, Kasten M, Blanc J, Affentranger A, Aschwanden F. Urology residency - a demographic cross-sectional study by the Swiss Society of Residents in Urology. BJU Int 2025; 135:884-886. [PMID: 39973000 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16684] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/21/2025]
Affiliation(s)
- Silvan Sigg
- Department of Urology, Cantonal Hospital Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - Luca Afferi
- Department of Urology, Cantonal Hospital Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
- Department of Urology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
- Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Fabienne Lehner
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Balgrist, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Sarah Dugas
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Madlen Kasten
- Department of Urology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Julien Blanc
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | - Fabian Aschwanden
- Department of Urology, Cantonal Hospital Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Siech C, Kluth LA, Konopka M, Reimann M, Plage H, Lichy I, Gerdes B, Kasperek J, Humke C, Marks P, Fisch M, Karakiewicz PI, Chun FKH, Schäfer T, Meyer CP, Kaulfuss JC. [Sex-specific differences in surgical confidence: results of the Endo Workshop of the German Society of Residents in Urology 2022]. UROLOGIE (HEIDELBERG, GERMANY) 2024; 63:1122-1128. [PMID: 39190147 PMCID: PMC11549232 DOI: 10.1007/s00120-024-02429-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/16/2024] [Indexed: 08/28/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Simulation-based training is gaining importance in urologic residents training. OBJECTIVES This prospective study evaluated the influence of the Endo Workshop of the German Society of Residents in Urology e. V. (GeSRU) on surgical confidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS GeSRU Endo Workshop 2022 included 1 h simulation-based training sessions on stone removal using ureteroscopy (URS) and transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB). Using an online questionnaire, surgical confidence was assessed before and after the workshop. Surgical assessment relied on the global rating scale (GRS). RESULTS Overall, 40 residents participated: 25 (62.5%) men and 15 (37.5%) women. In URS assessment, men vs. women achieved an average of 26.6 vs. 26.1/35 points on the GRS (p = 0.7) and completed the task in 8.1 ± 1.9 vs. 9.9 ± 0.4 min (p < 0.001). In TURB assessment, men vs. women achieved an average of 26.0 vs. 27.3/35 points on the GRS (p = 0.3) and required 7.6 ± 1.9 vs. 7.7 ± 2.2 min (p = 0.9), respectively. Among participants who answered the baseline survey and the evaluation (n = 33), 16 (80%) men vs. 3 (23%) women had surgical confidence to perform URS before (p = 0.01), and 19 (95%) men vs. 7 (54%) women after the workshop (p = 0.03). Regarding the performance of TURB, 10 (50%) men vs. 7 (54%) women reported surgical confidence before (p = 0.1), and 15 (75%) men vs. 10 (77%) women after the workshop (p = 1.0). An increase in surgical confidence to perform URS and TURB was reported by 9 (45%) and 10 (50%) men and 9 (69%) and 8 (62%) women, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Endourologic simulation-based training increases surgical confidence of both female and male residents. Despite comparable surgical outcomes, women approach URS with lower surgical confidence compared to their male counterparts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolin Siech
- Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Urologie, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland.
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Kanada.
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Urologie, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland
| | - Mareen Konopka
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Maximilian Reimann
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Henning Plage
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Isabel Lichy
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Benedikt Gerdes
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Jan Kasperek
- Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Urologie, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland
| | - Clara Humke
- Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Urologie, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland
| | - Phillip Marks
- Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - Margit Fisch
- Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Kanada
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Urologie, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland
| | - Timm Schäfer
- Universitätsklinik für Urologie, Campus OWL, Klinikum Herford, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herford, Deutschland
| | - Christian P Meyer
- Universitätsklinik für Urologie, Campus OWL, Klinikum Herford, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herford, Deutschland
| | - Julia C Kaulfuss
- Klinik für Urologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Basile G, Gallioli A, Diana P, Gallagher A, Larcher A, Graefen M, Harke N, Traxer O, Tilki D, Van Der Poel H, Emiliani E, Angerri O, Wagner C, Montorsi F, Wiklund P, Somani B, Buffi N, Mottrie A, Liatsikos E, Breda A. Current Standards for Training in Robot-assisted Surgery and Endourology: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2024; 86:130-145. [PMID: 38644144 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2024] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 04/08/2024] [Indexed: 04/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Different training programs have been developed to improve trainee outcomes in urology. However, evidence on the optimal training methodology is sparse. Our aim was to provide a comprehensive description of the training programs available for urological robotic surgery and endourology, assess their validity, and highlight the fundamental elements of future training pathways. METHODS We systematically reviewed the literature using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The validity of each training model was assessed. The methodological quality of studies on metrics and curricula was graded using the MERSQI scale. The level of evidence (LoE) and level of recommendation for surgical curricula were awarded using the educational Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 75 studies were identified. Many simulators have been developed to aid trainees in mastering skills required for both robotic and endourology procedures, but only four demonstrated predictive validity. For assessment of trainee proficiency, we identified 18 in robotics training and six in endourology training; however, the majority are Likert-type scales. Although proficiency-based progression (PBP) curricula demonstrated superior outcomes to traditional training in preclinical settings, only four of six (67%) in robotics and three of nine (33%) in endourology are PBP-based. Among these, the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery and the SIMULATE curricula have the highest LoE (level 1b). The lack of a quantitative synthesis is the main limitation of our study. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Training curricula that integrate simulators and PBP methodology have been introduced to standardize trainee outcomes in robotics and endourology. However, evidence regarding their educational impact remains restricted to preclinical studies. Efforts should be made to expand these training programs to different surgical procedures and assess their clinical impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Basile
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
| | - Andrea Gallioli
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
| | - Pietro Diana
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain; Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Institute IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Anthony Gallagher
- Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium
| | | | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Nina Harke
- Department of Urology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Henk Van Der Poel
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Oriol Angerri
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Christian Wagner
- Prostate Center Northwest, Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Uro-Oncology, St. Antonius-Hospital, Gronau, Germany
| | | | - Peter Wiklund
- Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System New York City, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Bhaskar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Nicolò Buffi
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Institute IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Alex Mottrie
- ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium
| | | | - Alberto Breda
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Prata F, Ragusa A, Civitella A, Tuzzolo P, Tedesco F, Cacciatore L, Iannuzzi A, Callè P, Raso G, Fantozzi M, Pira M, Ricci M, Pino M, Minore A, Basile S, Testa A, Crimi VG, Deanesi N, Travino A, D'Addurno G, Scarpa RM, Papalia R. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy using the novel Hugo™ RAS system: Feasibility, setting and perioperative outcomes of the first off-clamp series. Urologia 2024; 91:372-378. [PMID: 38174713 DOI: 10.1177/03915603231220109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hugo Robot-Assisted Surgery (RAS) System has been conceived with enhanced modularity but its role for nephron-sparing surgery setting still remains poorly explored. We aimed to describe our experience in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with a three-arms setting for the first off-clamp series using the new Hugo RAS System. METHODS Patients were placed on an extended flank position at the margin of the surgical bed with a slightly flexion (45°). The first 11 mm robotic trocar (camera port) was placed along the pararectal line 14 ± 2 cm far from the umbilicus. The pneumoperitoneum was then induced through the AirSeal system (SurgiQuest, Milford, Connecticut, USA©). Two more 8 mm operative robotic ports were placed under direct vision, either 8 ± 1 cm far from optic's port. Two 12 mm laparoscopic ports for bed-assistant were placed between robotic ports. Monopolar curved shears, fenestrated grasper, and large needle driver were used in a three-instruments configuration. RESULTS Off-clamp RAPN was successfully performed in seven patients with cT1 renal masses using a trans-peritoneal route. Median port placement and docking time was 6 min (IQR, 4-8 min). Hemostasis was achieved through renorraphy using a single transfix stitch with sliding clips technique. There was no need for additional ports placement. No intraoperative complications occurred, no clashing of robotic instruments or between the robotic arms was observed. No technical failures of the system occurred. Median console time was 83 min (IQR, 68-115 min). Median estimated blood loss were 200 ml (IQR, 50-400 ml). All patients were discharged between post-operative day 2 and 3, without the need of hospital readmission. No complications were recorded within the first 30 post-operative days. CONCLUSIONS We performed the first series of off-clamp RAPN using the novel HUGO RAS System. This novel robotic platform showed an easy-friendly docking system, providing excellent perioperative outcomes with a simple three-arms configuration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Prata
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Ragusa
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Civitella
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - P Tuzzolo
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - F Tedesco
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - L Cacciatore
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Iannuzzi
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - P Callè
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - G Raso
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - M Fantozzi
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - M Pira
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - M Ricci
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - M Pino
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Minore
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - S Basile
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Testa
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - V G Crimi
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - N Deanesi
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - A Travino
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - G D'Addurno
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - R M Scarpa
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| | - R Papalia
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|