BACKGROUND: The rising interest towards minimally invasive surgery has led to the introduction of laparo-endoscopic single site (LESS) surgery as the natural evolution of conventional multiport laparoscopy. However, this new surgical approach is hampered with peculiar technical difficulties. The SPIDER surgical system has been developed in the attempt to overcome some of these challenges. Our study aimed to compare standard laparoscopy and SPIDER technical performance on a surgical simulator, using standardized tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS). METHODS: Twenty participants were divided into two groups based on their surgical laparoscopic experience: 10 PGY1 residents were included in the inexperienced group and 10 laparoscopists in the experienced group. Participants performed the FLS pegboard transfers task and pattern cutting task on a laparoscopic box trainer. Objective task scores and subjective questionnaire rating scales were used to compare conventional laparoscopy and SPIDER surgical system. RESULTS: Both groups performed significantly better in the FLS scores on the standard laparoscopic simulator compared to the SPIDER. Inexperienced group: Task 1 scores (median 252.5 vs. 228.5; p = 0.007); Task 2 scores (median 270.5 vs. 219.0; p = 0.005). Experienced group: Task 1 scores (median 411.5 vs. 309.5; p = 0.005); Task 2 scores (median 418.0 vs. 331.5; p = 0.007). Same aspects were highlighted for the subjective evaluations, except for the inexperienced surgeons who found both devices equivalent in terms of ease of use only in the peg transfer task. CONCLUSIONS: Even though the SPIDER is an innovative and promising device, our study proved that it is more challenging than conventional laparoscopy in a population with different degrees of surgical experience. We presume that a possible way to overcome such challenges could be the development of tailored training programs through simulation methods. This may represent an effective way to deliver training, achieve mastery and skills and prepare surgeons for their future clinical experience.
Spider surgical system versus multiport laparoscopic surgery. Performance comparison on a surgical simulator / Giannotti, Domenico; Casella, Giovanni; Patrizi, Gregorio; DI ROCCO, Giorgio; CASTAGNETO GISSEY, Lidia; Metere, Alessio; Bernieri, MARIA GIULIA; Vestri, Anna Rita; Redler, Adriano. - In: BMC SURGERY. - ISSN 1471-2482. - STAMPA. - 15:1(2015), p. 54. [10.1186/s12893-015-0038-9]
Spider surgical system versus multiport laparoscopic surgery. Performance comparison on a surgical simulator
GIANNOTTI, DOMENICO;CASELLA, GIOVANNIInvestigation
;PATRIZI, Gregorio
;DI ROCCO, GIORGIO;CASTAGNETO GISSEY, LIDIA;METERE, ALESSIO;BERNIERI, MARIA GIULIA;VESTRI, Anna Rita;REDLER, Adriano
2015
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rising interest towards minimally invasive surgery has led to the introduction of laparo-endoscopic single site (LESS) surgery as the natural evolution of conventional multiport laparoscopy. However, this new surgical approach is hampered with peculiar technical difficulties. The SPIDER surgical system has been developed in the attempt to overcome some of these challenges. Our study aimed to compare standard laparoscopy and SPIDER technical performance on a surgical simulator, using standardized tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS). METHODS: Twenty participants were divided into two groups based on their surgical laparoscopic experience: 10 PGY1 residents were included in the inexperienced group and 10 laparoscopists in the experienced group. Participants performed the FLS pegboard transfers task and pattern cutting task on a laparoscopic box trainer. Objective task scores and subjective questionnaire rating scales were used to compare conventional laparoscopy and SPIDER surgical system. RESULTS: Both groups performed significantly better in the FLS scores on the standard laparoscopic simulator compared to the SPIDER. Inexperienced group: Task 1 scores (median 252.5 vs. 228.5; p = 0.007); Task 2 scores (median 270.5 vs. 219.0; p = 0.005). Experienced group: Task 1 scores (median 411.5 vs. 309.5; p = 0.005); Task 2 scores (median 418.0 vs. 331.5; p = 0.007). Same aspects were highlighted for the subjective evaluations, except for the inexperienced surgeons who found both devices equivalent in terms of ease of use only in the peg transfer task. CONCLUSIONS: Even though the SPIDER is an innovative and promising device, our study proved that it is more challenging than conventional laparoscopy in a population with different degrees of surgical experience. We presume that a possible way to overcome such challenges could be the development of tailored training programs through simulation methods. This may represent an effective way to deliver training, achieve mastery and skills and prepare surgeons for their future clinical experience.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Giannotti_Spider-surgical-system_2015.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
1.4 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.4 MB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.