Fabien Leblanc

Single-incision vs straight laparoscopic segmental colectomy: a case-controlled study.

PURPOSE: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is gaining momentum in general surgery but it is essentially unstudied for laparoscopic colectomy. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic colectomy with laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy were prospectively entered into an institutional review board-approved database. Those that underwent single-incision laparoscopic colectomy were case matched for sex, age, disease, surgery, body mass index, previous surgeries, and surgeon with patients undergoing LAC. RESULTS: Twenty-nine single-incision laparoscopic segmental colectomies were performed for polyps (4), adenocarcinoma (12), diverticulitis (6), and Crohns disease (7) and were case matched to laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for the same indications. Mean body mass index was 28.8 ± 3 kg/m2. Operative time was longer for single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (134.4 ± 40 vs 103.8 ± 54 min; P = .0002). Four single-incision laparoscopic colectomies were converted to LAC requiring either one extra port (2) or 2 extra ports (2), and there was one conversion to laparotomy. Extraction scar length (millimeters) was similar (38 ± 6.0 vs 45 ± 6.2; P = .746). Postoperative morbidity (5/29 vs 7/29; P = .284) and length of stay (day) (3.7 ± 1.1 vs 3.9 ± 1.1; P = .445) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy is feasible and safe but takes more time than laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. Although results approximate those for laparoscopic-assisted colectomy, an additional learning curve is involved, and extra incisions are sometimes required. Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy requires further prospective validation so that the cost of the device can be justified by an improved clinical outcome.

A comparison of human cadaver and augmented reality simulator models for straight laparoscopic colorectal skills acquisition training.

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to compare the human cadaver model with an augmented reality simulator for straight laparoscopic colorectal skills acquisition. STUDY DESIGN Thirty-five sigmoid colectomies were performed on a cadaver (n = 7) or an augmented reality simulator (n = 28) during a laparoscopic training course. Prior laparoscopic colorectal experience was assessed. Objective structured technical skills assessment forms were completed by trainers and trainees independently. Groups were compared according to technical skills and events scores and satisfaction with training model. RESULTS Prior laparoscopic experience was similar in both groups. For trainers and trainees, technical skills scores were considerably better on the simulator than on the cadaver. For trainers, generic events score was also considerably better on the simulator than on the cadaver. The main generic event occurring on both models was errors in the use of retraction. The main specific event occurring on both models was bowel perforation. Global satisfaction was better for the cadaver than for the simulator model (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The human cadaver model was more difficult but better appreciated than the simulator for laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy training. Simulator training followed by cadaver training can appropriately integrate simulators into the learning curve and maintain the benefits of both training methodologies.

Virtual reality simulator training for laparoscopic colectomy: what metrics have construct validity?

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic colectomy has been used for training of surgical residents and has been considered as a model for technical skills assessment of board-eligible colorectal surgeons. However, construct validity (the ability to distinguish between skill levels) must be confirmed before widespread implementation. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to specifically determine which metrics for laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy have evidence of construct validity. DESIGN: General surgeons that had performed fewer than 30 laparoscopic colon resections and laparoscopic colorectal experts (>200 laparoscopic colon resections) performed laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy on the LAP Mentor model. All participants received a 15-minute instructional warm-up and had never used the simulator before the study. Performance was then compared between each group for 21 metrics (procedural, 14; intraoperative errors, 7) to determine specifically which measurements demonstrate construct validity. Performance was compared with the Mann-Whitney U-test (p < 0.05 was significant). RESULTS: Fifty-three surgeons; 29 general surgeons, and 24 colorectal surgeons enrolled in the study. The virtual reality simulators for laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy demonstrated construct validity for 8 of 14 procedural metrics by distinguishing levels of surgical experience (p < 0.05). The most discriminatory procedural metrics (p < 0.01) favoring experts were reduced instrument path length, accuracy of the peritoneal/medial mobilization, and dissection of the inferior mesenteric artery. Intraoperative errors were not discriminatory for most metrics and favored general surgeons for colonic wall injury (general surgeons, 0.7; colorectal surgeons, 3.5; p = 0.045). LIMITATIONS: Individual variability within the general surgeon and colorectal surgeon groups was not accounted for. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual reality simulators for laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy demonstrated construct validity for 8 procedure-specific metrics. However, using virtual reality simulator metrics to detect intraoperative errors did not discriminate between groups. If the virtual reality simulator continues to be used for the technical assessment of trainees and board-eligible surgeons, the evaluation of performance should be limited to procedural metrics.

Assessment of Comparative Skills Between Hand-Assisted and Straight Laparoscopic Colorectal Training on an Augmented Reality Simulator

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare skills sets during a hand-assisted and straight laparoscopic colectomy on an augmented reality simulator. METHODS: Twenty-nine surgeons, assigned randomly in 2 groups, performed laparoscopic sigmoid colectomies on a simulator: group A (n = 15) performed hand-assisted then straight procedures; group B (n = 14) performed straight then hand-assisted procedures. Groups were compared according to prior laparoscopic colorectal experience, performance (time, instrument path length, and instrument velocity changes), technical skills, and operative error. RESULTS: Prior laparoscopic colorectal experience was similar in both groups. Both groups had better performances with the hand-assisted approach, although technical skill scores were similar between approaches. The error rate was higher with the hand-assisted approach in group A, but similar between both approaches in group B. CONCLUSIONS: These data define the metrics of performance for hand-assisted and straight laparoscopic colectomy on an augmented reality simulator. The improved scores with the hand-assisted approach suggest that with this simulator a hand-assisted model may be technically easier to perform, although it is associated with increased intraoperative errors.