Vardas Panos N, Stefanescu Schmidt Ada C, Lou Xiaoying, Goldstone Andrew B, Pattakos Gregory, Fiedler Amy G, Stephens Elizabeth H, Tchantchaleishvili Vakhtang
Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Division of Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2017 Nov;104(5):1748-1754. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.07.020. Epub 2017 Sep 29.
Endovascular interventions for cardiovascular pathology are becoming increasingly relevant to cardiothoracic surgery. This study assessed the perceived prevalence and efficacy of endovascular skills training and identified differences among training paradigms.
Trainee responses to questions in the 2016 In-Service Training Examination survey regarding endovascular training were analyzed based on the four different cardiothoracic surgery training pathways: traditional 2- and 3-year thoracic, integrated 6-year, and combined 4+3 general and thoracic residency programs.
The duration of endovascular training was substantially different among programs, at a median of 17 weeks for integrated 6-year, 8.5 weeks for 3-year, 6 weeks for 4+3, and 4 weeks for 2-year residency (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for year of training and program type, the duration of endovascular rotations was significantly associated with self-assessed comfort with catheter-based skills (p < 0.0001). Eighty-two percent of residents rotated with trainees from other specialties, and 58% experienced competition for cases. Residents reported greater exposure to transcatheter aortic valve replacement than to thoracic endovascular aortic repair, cardiac catheterization, percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect, and transcatheter mitral valve surgery (p < 0.0001). A significant proportion of responders reported feeling uncomfortable performing key steps of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (52%) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (49%).
Considerable heterogeneity exists in endovascular training among cardiothoracic surgery training pathways, with a significant number of residents having minimal to no exposure to these emerging techniques. These findings highlight the need for a standardized curriculum to improve endovascular exposure and training.
心血管疾病的血管内介入治疗在心胸外科手术中变得越来越重要。本研究评估了血管内技能培训的感知患病率和效果,并确定了培训模式之间的差异。
根据四种不同的心胸外科手术培训途径,分析了学员对2016年在职培训考试调查中有关血管内培训问题的回答:传统的2年制和3年制胸外科、6年制综合培训以及4+3年制普通外科和胸外科联合住院医师培训项目。
各项目的血管内培训时长存在显著差异,6年制综合培训的中位数为17周,3年制为8.5周,4+3年制为6周,2年制住院医师培训为4周(p<0.0001)。在调整培训年份和项目类型后,血管内轮转时长与基于导管技能的自我评估舒适度显著相关(p<0.0001)。82%的住院医师与其他专科的学员一起轮转,58%的人经历过病例竞争。住院医师报告称,与胸主动脉腔内修复术、心导管检查、经皮房间隔缺损封堵术和经导管二尖瓣手术相比,他们接触经导管主动脉瓣置换术的机会更多(p<0.0001)。相当一部分受访者表示,在进行经导管主动脉瓣置换术(52%)或胸主动脉腔内修复术(49%)的关键步骤时感到不自在。
心胸外科手术培训途径中的血管内培训存在相当大的异质性,大量住院医师对这些新兴技术的接触极少或没有接触。这些发现凸显了制定标准化课程以改善血管内接触和培训的必要性。