• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

微创肝切除术学习曲线的起始、标准化和熟练(ISP)阶段: fellowship 培训外科医生与先驱和早期采用者的比较。

The initiation, standardization and proficiency (ISP) phases of the learning curve for minimally invasive liver resection: comparison of a fellowship-trained surgeon with the pioneers and early adopters.

机构信息

Departement de Chirurgie Digestive, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, de Poissy/Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 10, Rue du Champ Gaillard, 78300, Poissy, France.

Unità Chirurgia Epatobiliopancreatica, Robotica e Mininvasiva, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, via Bissolati, 57, 25124, Brescia, Italy.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2021 Sep;35(9):5268-5278. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08122-1. Epub 2020 Nov 10.

DOI:10.1007/s00464-020-08122-1
PMID:33174100
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Using the Ideal Development Exploration Assessment and Long-term study (IDEAL) paradigm, Halls et al. created risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) curves concluding that Pioneers (P) and Early Adopters (EA) of minimally invasive (MI) liver resection obtained similar results after fewer cases. In this study, we applied this framework to a MI Hepatic-Pancreatic and Biliary fellowship-trained surgeon (FT) in order to assess where along the curves this generation fell.

METHODS

The term FT was used to designate surgeons without previous independent operative experience who went from surgical residency directly into fellowship. Three phases of the learning curve were defined using published data on EAs and Ps of MI Hepatectomy, including phase 1 (initiation) (i.e., the first 17 or 50), phase 2 (standardization) (i.e., cases 18-46 or 1-50) and phase 3 (proficiency) (i.e., cases after 46, 50 or 135). Data analysis was performed using the Social Science Statistics software ( www.socscistatistics.com ). Statistical significance was defined as p < .05.

RESULTS

From November 2007 until April 2018, 95 MI hepatectomies were performed by a FT. During phase 1, the FT approached larger tumors than the EA group (p = 0.002), that were more often malignant (94.1%) when compared to the P group (52.5%) (p < 0.001). During phase 2, the FT operated on larger tumors and more malignancies (93.1%) when compared to the Ps (p = 0.004 and p = 0.017, respectively). However, there was no difference when compared to the EA. In the phase 3, the EAs tended to perform more major hepatectomies (58.7) when compared to either the FT (30.6%) (p = 0.002) or the P's cases 51-135 and after 135 (35.3% and 44.3%, respectively) (both p values < 0.001). When compared to the Ps cases from 51-135, the FT operated on more malignancies (p = 0.012), but this was no longer the case after 135 cases by the Ps (p = 0.164). There were no statistically significant differences when conversions; major complications or 30- and 90-day mortality were compared among these 3 groups.

DISCUSSION

Using the IDEAL framework and RA-CUSUM curves, a FT surgeon was found to have curves similar to EAs despite having no previous independent experience operating on the liver. As in our study, FTs may tend to approach larger and more malignant tumors and do more concomitant procedures in patients with higher ASA classifications than either of their predecessors, without statistically significant increases in major morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

It is possible that the ISP (i.e., initiation, standardization, proficiency) model could apply to other innovative surgical procedures, creating different learning curves depending on where along the IDEAL paradigm surgeons fall.

摘要

背景

使用理想发展探索评估和长期研究(IDEAL)范式,Halls 等人创建了风险调整累积和(RA-CUSUM)曲线,得出结论认为微创(MI)肝切除术的先驱者(P)和早期采用者(EA)在完成较少病例后获得了相似的结果。在这项研究中,我们将该框架应用于一位 MI 肝胰胆和胆道 fellowship培训外科医生(FT),以评估这一代外科医生处于曲线的哪个位置。

方法

使用术语 FT 来指定没有先前独立手术经验的外科医生,他们直接从外科住院医师培训进入 fellowship。使用 MI 肝切除术的 EA 和 P 的已发表数据定义了三个学习曲线阶段,包括阶段 1(起始)(即前 17 或 50 例)、阶段 2(标准化)(即第 18-46 或 1-50 例)和阶段 3(熟练)(即第 46、50 或 135 例以后)。使用社会科学统计软件(www.socscistatistics.com)进行数据分析。定义统计学意义为 p<0.05。

结果

从 2007 年 11 月到 2018 年 4 月,一位 FT 完成了 95 例 MI 肝切除术。在阶段 1,FT 接近的肿瘤比 EA 组大(p=0.002),并且与 P 组(52.5%)相比,更常为恶性肿瘤(94.1%)(p<0.001)。在阶段 2,FT 进行的肿瘤更大,恶性肿瘤更多(93.1%),与 Ps 相比(p=0.004 和 p=0.017)。然而,与 EA 相比,这并没有差异。在第 3 阶段,EA 倾向于进行更多的主要肝切除术(58.7%),与 FT(30.6%)(p=0.002)或 P 的病例 51-135 和 135 例以后(分别为 35.3%和 44.3%)(均 p 值<0.001)相比。与 P 的病例 51-135 相比,FT 进行的恶性肿瘤更多(p=0.012),但在 P 的病例 135 例以后,这不再是情况(p=0.164)。在转换、主要并发症或 30 天和 90 天死亡率方面,这三组之间没有统计学上的显著差异。

讨论

使用 IDEAL 框架和 RA-CUSUM 曲线,发现 FT 外科医生的曲线与 EA 相似,尽管他们之前没有独立操作肝脏的经验。与我们的研究一样,FT 可能倾向于接近更大和更恶性的肿瘤,并在 ASA 分级较高的患者中进行更多的伴随手术,而不会导致主要发病率或死亡率的统计学显著增加。

结论

ISP(即起始、标准化、熟练)模型可能适用于其他创新手术程序,根据外科医生在 IDEAL 范例中的位置创建不同的学习曲线。

相似文献

1
The initiation, standardization and proficiency (ISP) phases of the learning curve for minimally invasive liver resection: comparison of a fellowship-trained surgeon with the pioneers and early adopters.微创肝切除术学习曲线的起始、标准化和熟练(ISP)阶段: fellowship 培训外科医生与先驱和早期采用者的比较。
Surg Endosc. 2021 Sep;35(9):5268-5278. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08122-1. Epub 2020 Nov 10.
2
The experience of the minimally invasive (MI) fellowship-trained (FT) hepatic-pancreatic and biliary (HPB) surgeon: could the outcome of MI pancreatoduodenectomy for peri-ampullary tumors be better than open?微创(MI) fellowship 培训(FT)的肝胰和肝胆(HPB)外科医生的经验:经 MI 胰十二指肠切除术治疗壶腹周围肿瘤的结果是否优于开放手术?
Surg Endosc. 2021 Sep;35(9):5256-5267. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08118-x. Epub 2020 Nov 4.
3
Critical appraisal of the learning curve of minimally invasive hepatectomy: experience with the first 200 cases of a Southeast Asian early adopter.微创肝切除术学习曲线的评价:一位东南亚早期采用者的前 200 例经验。
ANZ J Surg. 2020 Jun;90(6):1092-1098. doi: 10.1111/ans.15683. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
4
The effect of proctoring on the learning curve of transanal minimally invasive surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasms.监考对直肠肿瘤经肛门微创手术局部切除学习曲线的影响。
Tech Coloproctol. 2018 Dec;22(12):965-975. doi: 10.1007/s10151-018-1910-2. Epub 2018 Dec 17.
5
Modified liver hanging maneuver in laparoscopic major hepatectomy: the learning curve and evolution of indications.改良肝脏悬挂法在腹腔镜肝切除术的应用:学习曲线和适应证的演变。
Surg Endosc. 2020 Jun;34(6):2742-2748. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07248-1. Epub 2019 Nov 11.
6
Evaluating the learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study between standard and learning curve CUSUM.评估腹腔镜肝切除术的学习曲线:标准和学习曲线累积和(CUSUM)比较研究。
HPB (Oxford). 2019 Nov;21(11):1505-1512. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.03.362. Epub 2019 Apr 13.
7
Surgeon Experience Influences Robotics Learning Curve for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion: A Cumulative Sum Analysis.外科医生经验对微创腰椎融合术机器人学习曲线的影响:累积和分析
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2023 Nov 1;48(21):1517-1525. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004745. Epub 2023 Jun 7.
8
Learning curve analysis after 500 robotic hepatectomies.500 例机器人肝切除术学习曲线分析。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2024 Jul;28(7):1039-1044. doi: 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.012. Epub 2024 Apr 16.
9
Learning curves in minimally invasive hepatectomy: systematic review and meta-regression analysis.微创肝切除术的学习曲线:系统评价和荟萃回归分析。
Br J Surg. 2021 Apr 30;108(4):351-358. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaa118.
10
Robotic major and minor hepatectomy: critical appraisal of learning curve and its impact on outcomes.机器人辅助肝大部切除术和肝小部切除术:学习曲线的批判性评估及其对手术结果的影响
Surg Endosc. 2023 Apr;37(4):2915-2922. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09809-3. Epub 2022 Dec 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Alpha-Synuclein Seed Amplification Assays in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.帕金森病中的α-突触核蛋白种子扩增检测:系统评价与网状Meta分析
Clin Pract. 2025 Jun 3;15(6):107. doi: 10.3390/clinpract15060107.
2
Fast track surgery nursing models accelerate physical rehabilitation in perioperative patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery.快速康复外科护理模式可加速接受肝胆手术的围手术期患者的身体康复。
Am J Transl Res. 2025 Apr 15;17(4):2976-2983. doi: 10.62347/CQCF2993. eCollection 2025.
3
Learning curve analysis of 100 consecutive robotic liver resections.

本文引用的文献

1
Learning curve in laparoscopic liver surgery: a fellow's perspective.腹腔镜肝脏手术的学习曲线:一位进修医生的视角
Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2015 Dec;4(6):411-6. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2304-3881.2015.06.07.
2
Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka.腹腔镜肝切除术推荐意见:在盛冈召开的第二届国际共识会议报告
Ann Surg. 2015 Apr;261(4):619-29. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001184.
3
[Laparoscopic liver surgery for metastases of colorectal cancer: analysis of a monocentric experience].
连续100例机器人肝脏切除术的学习曲线分析
Surg Endosc. 2025 Apr;39(4):2512-2522. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11551-5. Epub 2025 Feb 27.
4
Laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases after portal vein embolization: international multicentre study.经门静脉栓塞化疗后腹腔镜与开腹右半肝切除术治疗结直肠癌肝转移的国际多中心研究。
Br J Surg. 2024 Aug 2;111(8). doi: 10.1093/bjs/znae181.
5
Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgery on Anatomic Liver Segmentectomy Using the Extrahepatic Glissonean Approach.微创外科手术对采用肝外Glissonean入路的解剖性肝段切除术的影响。
J Pers Med. 2024 Jan 20;14(1):120. doi: 10.3390/jpm14010120.
6
10 years, 100 robotic major hepatectomies: a single-center experience.10 年,100 例机器人辅助肝切除术:单中心经验。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Feb;38(2):902-907. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10459-2. Epub 2023 Oct 16.
7
Learning curves in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a different experience for each generation.腹腔镜胰体尾切除术的学习曲线:每一代人都有不同的体验。
Int J Surg. 2023 Jun 1;109(6):1648-1655. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000408.
8
Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection for huge (≥10 cm) liver tumors: an international multicenter propensity-score matched cohort study of 799 cases.机器人手术与腹腔镜手术治疗巨大(≥10厘米)肝脏肿瘤:一项799例的国际多中心倾向评分匹配队列研究。
Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2023 Apr 10;12(2):205-215. doi: 10.21037/hbsn-22-283. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
9
Near-zero open conversion rate of laparoscopic liver resection: a high-volume single-center experience of the past 5 years.腹腔镜肝切除的近零中转开腹率:一项过去 5 年大样本量单中心经验。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Mar;37(3):1813-1821. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09661-5. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
10
The preoperative M2BPGi score predicts operative difficulty and the incidence of postoperative complications in laparoscopic liver resection.术前M2BPGi评分可预测腹腔镜肝切除术中的手术难度及术后并发症的发生率。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Feb;37(2):1262-1273. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09664-2. Epub 2022 Sep 29.
[腹腔镜肝手术治疗结直肠癌肝转移:单中心经验分析]
Suppl Tumori. 2005 May-Jun;4(3):S135-7.