Passerotti Carlo C, Franco Felipe, Bissoli Julio C C, Tiseo Bruno, Oliveira Caio M, Buchalla Carlos A O, Inoue Gustavo N C, Sencan Arzu, Sencan Aydin, do Pardo Rogerio Ruscitto, Nguyen Hiep T
Urology Department, College of Medicine, University of São Paulo (FMUSP), São Paulo, Brazil.
Int Urol Nephrol. 2015 Jul;47(7):1075-84. doi: 10.1007/s11255-015-0991-3. Epub 2015 Apr 26.
Robotic assistance may provide for distinct technical advantages over conventional laparoscopic technique. The goals of this study were (1) to objectively evaluate the difference in the learning curves by novice and expert surgeons in performing fundamental laparoscopic skills using conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) and (2) to evaluate the surgeons' frustration level in performing these tasks.
Twelve experienced and 31 novices in laparoscopy were prospectively evaluated in performing three standardized laparoscopic tasks in five consecutive, weekly training sessions. Analysis of the learning curves was based on the magnitude, rate, and quickness in performance improvement. The participant's frustration and mood were also evaluated during and after every session.
For the novice participants, RALS allowed for shorter time to task completion and greater accuracy. However, significant and rapid improvement in performance as measured by magnitude, rate, and quickness at each session was also seen with CLS. For the experienced surgeons, RALS only provided a slight improvement in performance. For all participants, the use of RALS was associated with less number of sessions in which they felt frustrated, less number of frustration episodes during a session, lower frustration score during and after the session, and higher good mood score.
The advantages of RALS may be of most benefit when doing more complex tasks and by less experienced surgeons. RALS should not be used as a replacement for CLS but rather in specific situations in which it has the greatest advantages.
与传统腹腔镜技术相比,机器人辅助可能具有明显的技术优势。本研究的目的是:(1)客观评估新手和专家外科医生在使用传统腹腔镜手术(CLS)和机器人辅助腹腔镜手术(RALS)执行基本腹腔镜技能时学习曲线的差异;(2)评估外科医生在执行这些任务时的挫败感水平。
对12名腹腔镜手术经验丰富者和31名新手进行前瞻性评估,让他们在连续五周的每周培训课程中执行三项标准化腹腔镜任务。学习曲线分析基于表现改善的幅度、速度和敏捷性。在每次课程期间和之后还评估了参与者的挫败感和情绪。
对于新手参与者,RALS可缩短任务完成时间并提高准确性。然而,CLS在每次课程中按幅度、速度和敏捷性衡量的表现也有显著且快速的改善。对于经验丰富的外科医生,RALS仅在表现上略有改善。对于所有参与者,使用RALS与他们感到挫败的课程次数减少、每次课程中的挫败事件次数减少、课程期间和之后的较低挫败得分以及较高的良好情绪得分相关。
当执行更复杂的任务且外科医生经验不足时,RALS的优势可能最为明显。RALS不应替代CLS,而应在其具有最大优势的特定情况下使用。