learning curve

学习曲线
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在使用医疗器械程序时,学习效果已被证明对结果有重大影响,是医疗器械安全监控的重要组成部分。为了支持对这些影响的估计,我们评估了我们在几个不同的实际数据集中对这些比率进行建模的方法,这些数据集中代表了由机构内聚集的医生治疗的患者,以显示该方法在不同应用中的灵活性.
    为了估计学习曲线效应,我们采用我们独特的学习曲线建模,以纳入机构和医生之间的学习层次结构,然后在已建立的方法中对它们进行建模,这些方法使用分层数据,如广义估计方程(GEE)。在实际数据集内,我们研究了两种设备类型和两种以前没有观察到的手术类型:非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术(CABG),和径向访问经验。我们还在GEE框架内尝试了针对这些不同设备/程序的中介分析。
    我们发现,根据快速或慢速学习建模的需要,用于生成“无学习”数据集的形状选择仍然是数据集特定的,但一般来说,幂级数或对数形状对于建模较慢的学习会更好,而指数可能对于更快的学习更好。中介分析也显示出在适应学习曲线建模方面的希望。
    展示了在各种应用中使用我们的方法的灵活性;这次利用每个患者完成的多个可能的程序,以便每个医生都有更多的体积,我们能够展示在不同数据应用中应用我们的方法的灵活性,以便更准确地捕获嵌套在机构内的医生的学习曲线率.这个可以,因此,全面用于设备和程序安全。
    UNASSIGNED: In the use of medical device procedures, learning effects have been shown to have a significant impact on the outcome, and are a critical component of medical device safety surveillance. To support estimation of these effects, we evaluated our methods for modeling these rates within several different actual datasets representing patients treated by physicians clustered within institutions to show the flexibility of this method across applications.
    UNASSIGNED: In order to estimate the learning curve effects, we employed our unique modeling for the learning curves to incorporate the learning hierarchy between institution and physicians, and then modeled them within established methods that work with hierarchical data such as generalized estimating equations (GEE). Within the actual datasets, we looked at two device types and also two procedure types which had not been observed before: off pump coronary artery bypass (CABG) experience, and radial access experience. We also tried mediation analyses within the GEE framework for these various devices/procedures as well.
    UNASSIGNED: We found that the choice of shape used to produce the \"learning-free\" dataset would still be dataset specific depending upon needs for modeling fast or slow learning but that in general the power series or logarithmic shapes would be better for modeling slower learning while exponential may be better for faster learning. Mediation analysis also showed promise in adapting the modeling of the learning curve.
    UNASSIGNED: In showing the flexibility of using our method in various applications; this time utilizing more than one possible procedure done per patient so that each physician had more volume, we were able to show the flexibility of applying our method in different data applications to allow for more accurately capturing the learning curve rates in physicians nested within institutions. This can, therefore, be used across the board for device and procedure safety.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:我们旨在介绍我们改良的手助后腹腔镜活体供肾切除术(HARPLDN)技术,并定义学习曲线。
    方法:纳入了2015年5月至2022年3月期间由同一位外科医生接受改良HARPLDN的138名肾脏捐献者。以总手术时间为研究结果,进行累积和(CUSUM)学习曲线分析。
    结果:总计,平均手术时间为138.2±32.1分钟。中位热缺血时间(WIT)和估计失血量分别为90s和50ml,分别。总手术时间的学习曲线最好用二阶多项式建模,方程如下:CUSUMOT(min)=(-0.09病例号2)+(12.88病例号)-67.77(R2=0.7875;p<0.05)。CUSUM学习曲线包括以下三个独特的阶段:第一阶段(最初的41例),代表初始学习曲线;第二阶段(中间43例),代表专家能力;和第三阶段(最后54个案例),代表掌握。总体6个月移植物存活率为99.3%,94.9%的移植物功能立即起效,无移植功能延迟和0.7%的输尿管并发症。
    结论:我们的改良方法对于活体供肾切除术是安全有效的,并且具有较短的手术时间和优化的WIT的优点。41例后,外科医生可以熟悉改良的HARPLDN,并有效地执行接下来的97例。
    BACKGROUND: We aimed to introduce our modified hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HARPLDN) technique and define the learning curve.
    METHODS: One hundred thirty-eight kidney donors who underwent modified HARPLDN by the same surgeon between May 2015 and March 2022 were included. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) learning curve analysis was performed with the total operation time as the study outcome.
    RESULTS: In total, the mean operative time was 138.2 ± 32.1 min. The median warm ischemic time (WIT) and estimated blood loss were 90 s and 50 ml, respectively. The learning curve for the total operative time was best modeled as a second-order polynomial with the following equation: CUSUMOT (min) = (-0.09 case number2) + (12.88 case number) - 67.77 (R2 = 0.7875; p<0.05). The CUSUM learning curve included the following three unique phases: phase 1 (the initial 41 cases), representing the initial learning curve; phase 2 (the middle 43 cases), representing expert competence; and phase 3 (the final 54 cases), representing mastery. The overall 6-month graft survival rate was 99.3%, with 94.9% immediate onset of graft function without delayed graft function and 0.7% ureteral complications.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our modified method is safe and effective for living donor nephrectomy and has the advantages of a shorter operating time and optimized WIT. The surgeon can become familiar with the modified HARPLDN after 41 cases and effectively perform the next 97 cases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    进行全髋关节置换术(THA)的直接前路(DAA)在世界范围内越来越受欢迎。然而,仔细选择患者和外科医生的经验是很重要的。尽管国际研究报告了有希望的结果,南亚和东南亚的DAA研究一直很有限。
    这项前瞻性研究包括了157名在2019年1月至2022年6月期间使用DAA接受THA的患者。将患者分为三组进行比较。术前数据,术中,并获得术后变量。使用CUSUM(累积求和法)检查了外科医生使用DAA方法的表现。
    患者的平均年龄为43.9岁。观察三组患者术中变量和并发症的差异,并且在后来的病例中报告了改善的结局.功能结果显示显著改善,组间无差异。学习曲线分析的结果表明,在第82例病例之后,向一致成功的方向转变,第118例达到可接受的失败率。
    这项研究的结果表明,DAA可以提供好处,但存在学习曲线。并发症最初很高,但在大约80例病例后开始减少。精心挑选病人至关重要,特别是在努力尽量减少被呈现一个具有挑战性的案例。这项研究提供的见解可能有助于外科医生考虑DAA;然而,需要进一步研究。
    UNASSIGNED: The direct anterior approach (DAA) for conducting total hip arthroplasty (THA) is gaining popularity worldwide. However, careful selection of patients and surgeon experience are important. Although promising outcomes have been reported in international studies, research on DAA in Southern and Southeast Asia has been limited.
    UNASSIGNED: This prospective study included 157 patients who underwent THA using the DAA between January 2019 and June 2022. The patients were divided into three groups for the comparison. Data on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were acquired. Improvement of the surgeon\'s performance to use of a DAA approach was examined using the CUSUM (cumulative summation method).
    UNASSIGNED: The mean age of the patients was 43.9 years. Differences in intraoperative variables and complications were observed among the three groups, and improved outcomes were reported in later cases. Functional outcomes showed significant improvement, and no differences were observed between groups. The results of learning curve analysis indicated a shift towards consistent success after the 82nd case, reaching an acceptable rate of failure by the 118th case.
    UNASSIGNED: The findings of this study suggest that DAA can offer benefits but there is a learning curve. Complications were initially high but began decreasing after approximately 80 cases. Careful selection of patients is critical, particularly in the effort to minimize being presented with a challenging case. This study provides insights that may be helpful to surgeons when considering DAA; however, further study is warranted.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景和目的:在良性前列腺增生(BPH)的手术治疗中,推荐激光前列腺摘除术替代经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)和开放性前列腺切除术(OP).thulium光纤激光器,以其表面穿透深度,可以通过减少热损伤和胶囊损伤来提供快速的学习过程。这项研究比较了前60例没有指导者进行thulium纤维前列腺摘除术(ThuFLEP)的内生科医师与经验丰富的外科医生进行OP和TURP的结果。它还标识ThuFLEP的操作时间开始达到平稳的案例编号。材料和方法:在2021年11月1日至2023年11月1日之间,将没有摘除经验的口腔内科医生的最初60例ThuFLEP病例与经验丰富的外科医生进行的TURP和OP手术进行了比较。由于前60例ThuFLEP病例涉及80-120毫升前列腺,在同一时期内进行的该尺寸范围内的TURP和OP操作包括在研究中。评估这些群体的年龄,术前和术后前列腺体积,PSA水平,IPSS,IPSS生活质量(QoL),和最大尿流(Qmax)。将60例连续的ThuFLEP患者分为三组,每组20例(第1、2和3组),并比较手术时间,IPSS,和Qmax。结果:TURP的手术时间短于ThuFLEP和OP(p<0.001)。ThuFLEP和OP在术后Qmax和IPSS方面无显著差异,而TURP的值低于其他两种方法。对于ThuFLEP,前20例手术时间较长,但第2组和第3组手术时间平稳(p<0.001)。ThuFLEP三组患者术后Qmax和IPSS值差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。结论:对于大型前列腺,ThuFLEP比TURP提供更好的术后结果,并且比OP提供更短的导管插入和住院时间。与其他激光技术相比,其短的学习曲线使其成为治疗BPH的首选方法。
    Background and Objectives: In the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), laser enucleation of the prostate is recommended as an alternative to transurethral resection (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP). The thulium fiber laser, with its superficial penetration depth, can offer a rapid learning process by causing less heat injury and capsule damage. This study compares the first 60 cases of an endourologist performing thulium fiber enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) without a mentor to the results of OP and TURP performed by experienced surgeons. It also identifies the case number at which the operation time for ThuFLEP starts to plateau. Materials and Methods: Between 1 November 2021 and 1 November 2023, the initial 60 ThuFLEP cases of an endourologist with no prior enucleation experience were compared with TURP and OP operations performed by experienced surgeons. Since the first 60 ThuFLEP cases involved 80-120 cc prostates, TURP and OP operations within this size range performed during the same period were included in the study. The groups were assessed for age, preoperative and postoperative prostate volume, PSA levels, the IPSS, the IPSS Quality of Life (QoL), and maximum urinary flow (Qmax). The 60 consecutive ThuFLEP cases were divided into three groups of 20 (Groups 1, 2, and 3) and compared for operation time, IPSS, and Qmax. Results: The operation time for TURP was shorter than for ThuFLEP and OP (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between ThuFLEP and OP in postoperative Qmax and IPSS, while TURP had lower values than the other two methods. For ThuFLEP, the operation time was longer in the first 20 cases but plateaued in groups 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Postoperative Qmax and IPSS values showed no significant differences among the three ThuFLEP groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: For large prostates, ThuFLEP provides better postoperative results than TURP and offers shorter catheterization and hospital stay times than OP. Its short learning curve makes it a preferable method for treating BPH compared to other laser techniques.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景与目的:经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)是目前治疗大肾结石的一种成功率高、并发症发生率低的方法。它可以在不同的位置进行,尤其是仰卧位和俯卧位。由于其优势,仰卧位的PCNL变得越来越普遍,如同步逆行干预和更好的麻醉管理。这项研究旨在评估位置的选择如何影响PCNL学习曲线。材料和方法:评估了2021年8月至2023年1月在结石治疗参考中心由两名独立的首席住院医师作为仰卧和俯卧位的主要外科医生进行的前50例连续PCNL病例的结果。两组人口统计学和临床数据,无石率,操作次数,和透视时间进行了比较。结果:仰卧位PCNL组平均手术时间为94.6±9.8min,俯卧PCNL组为129.9±20.3min(p<0.001)。仰卧PCNL和俯卧PCNL组的透视时间中位数分别为31(10-89)秒和48(23-156)秒,分别(p=0.001)。在操作过程中,仰卧PCNL组的第10例后达到平台期,而在第40例易感PCNL组中达到。结论:对于新手进行PCNL的外科医生,仰卧位PCNL可能提供更好的结果和更快的学习曲线。前瞻性和随机研究可以提供关于这一主题的更有力的结论。
    Background and Objectives: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a current treatment method with high success rates and low complication rates in treating large kidney stones. It can be conducted in different positions, especially supine and prone positions. PCNL in the supine position is becoming increasingly common due to its advantages, such as simultaneous retrograde intervention and better anesthesia management. This study aimed to assess how the choice of position impacts the PCNL learning curve. Materials and Methods: The results of the first 50 consecutive PCNL cases performed by two separate chief residents as primary surgeons in supine and prone positions in a reference center for stone treatment between August 2021 and January 2023 were evaluated. The two groups\' demographic and clinical data, stone-free rates, operation times, and fluoroscopy times were compared. Results: While the mean operation time was 94.6 ± 9.8 min in the supine PCNL group, it was 129.9 ± 20.3 min in the prone PCNL group (p < 0.001). Median fluoroscopy times in the supine PCNL and prone PCNL groups were 31 (10-89) seconds and 48 (23-156) seconds, respectively (p = 0.001). During the operation, the plateau was reached after the 10th case in the supine PCNL group, while it was reached after the 40th case in the prone PCNL group. Conclusions: For surgeons who are novices in performing PCNL, supine PCNL may offer both better results and a faster learning curve. Prospective and randomized studies can provide more robust conclusions on this subject.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    卵巢囊肿切除术,旨在保持生育能力,通过微创手术技术取得了进步。本研究评估了三种方法的学习曲线和手术结果:达芬奇机器人单站点(RSS),达芬奇机器人单端口(RSP)和腹腔镜内镜单部位手术(LESS)。为了分析这些技术的学习曲线和手术结果,提供对他们的有效性和熟练程度发展的见解。104例卵巢肿瘤患者的回顾性分析,分为RSS(n=52),RSP(n=22),和较少(n=30)组。分析的指标包括年龄,BMI,肿瘤大小,血红蛋白下降,手术时间,对接时间,控制台时间,和肿瘤的位置。年龄无显著差异,BMI,输血率,血红蛋白下降,或在这些群体中发现了逗留时间。RSS平均有较大的肿瘤,和LESS在右侧的发生率较高。LESS显示了最短的手术时间,而RSS和RSP具有相当的时间。RSS和RSP之间的停靠和控制台时间没有显着差异。RSP在对接和控制台方面比RSS更快地达到熟练程度,而LESS在手术时间上表现出最大的变异性。RSP提供了更快、更一致的学习曲线,使其有利于复杂的程序,而LESS提供较短的手术时间,但具有较高的变异性。这些发现对于医疗机构的外科培训和资源分配至关重要。
    Ovarian cystectomy, aimed at preserving fertility, has advanced through minimally invasive surgical techniques. This study evaluates the learning curves and surgical outcomes of three such approaches: DaVinci Robotic Single-Site (RSS), DaVinci Robotic Single-Port (RSP), and laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS). To analyze the learning curves and surgical outcomes for these techniques, providing insights into their effectiveness and proficiency development. Retrospective analysis of 104 patients with ovarian tumors, divided into RSS (n = 52), RSP (n = 22), and LESS (n = 30) groups. Metrics analyzed included age, BMI, tumor size, hemoglobin drop, operative time, docking time, console time, and tumor location. No significant differences in age, BMI, transfusion rate, hemoglobin drop, or length of stay were found among the groups. RSS had larger tumors on average, and LESS had a higher occurrence rate on the right side. LESS demonstrated the shortest operative time, while RSS and RSP had comparable times. Docking and console times did not differ significantly between RSS and RSP. RSP reached proficiency faster than RSS in docking and console times, while LESS exhibited the greatest variability in operative time. RSP offers a faster and more consistent learning curve, making it advantageous for complex procedures, whereas LESS provides shorter operative times but with higher variability. These findings are crucial for surgical training and resource allocation in medical institutions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:斜向腰椎椎间融合术(OLIF)仍然具有陡峭的学习曲线,许多想要发展的脊柱外科医生对此犹豫不决。本研究旨在通过对比分析两种牵开装置在学习曲线初期的应用情况,为初学者提供参考。
    方法:我们前瞻性地纳入了我们部门的外科医生使用OLIF治疗的前60例腰椎退行性疾病患者。根据手术中不同牵开装置的应用,将患者分为钩牵开器组和管状牵开器组。比较两组患者的临床效果及并发症发生情况。
    结果:钩牵开器组的平均年龄为62岁,管状牵开器组平均年龄65岁。在年龄上没有显著差异,性别,手术段,比较两组的随访时间和失血量。钩牵开器组的手术时间少于管状牵开器组。钩牵开器组并发症发生率(11.8%)明显低于管状牵开器组(38.5%)。
    结论:管状牵开器组在学习初期有更高的神经血管损伤风险,以及椎骨骨折的风险。相比之下,钩状牵开器组具有方法简单的优点,容错性高,并发症发生率相对较低。因此,我们认为,在OLIF学习曲线的早期阶段应用钩形牵开器更容易增加操作者的信心,使OLIF更容易接受。
    OBJECTIVE: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) still has a steep learning curve that many spinal surgeons who want to develop are hesitant. The purpose of this study is to provide reference for beginners through the comparative analysis of the application of two kinds of retraction devices in the early stage of learning curve.
    METHODS: We prospectively included the first 60 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with OLIF by a surgeon in our department. According to the application of different retraction devices during the operation, the patients were divided into hook retractor group and tubular retractor group. The clinical effects and complications of the two groups were compared.
    RESULTS: The average age of hook retractor group was 62 years old, the average age of tubular retractor group was 65 years old. There was no significant difference in age, sex, operative segment, follow-up time and blood loss between the two groups. The operation time in hook retractor group was less than that in tubular retractor group. The incidence of complications in hook retractor group (11.8%) was significantly lower than that in tubular retractor group (38.5%).
    CONCLUSIONS: The tubular retractor group has a higher risk of neurovascular injury in the initial stage of learning, as well as the risk of vertebral fracture. In contrast, the hook retractor group has the advantages of simple method, high fault tolerance and relatively low incidence of complications. Therefore, we believe that the application of hook retractor in the early stage of OLIF learning curve is easier to increase the operator\'s confidence and make OLIF more acceptable.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    腹壁下动脉穿支(DIEP)游离皮瓣是乳房再造的金标准,但技术要求很高,资源密集且耗时,这对初级外科医生来说是一项艰巨的任务。
    报告从一名外科医生进行他们的第一次150DIEP重建的经验中吸取的教训,作为初级外科医生的指南。
    关于2021年4月至2022年10月的患者人口统计学和手术结果的数据是从病历中回顾性收集的。使用MicrosoftExcel分析手术结果。
    超过17个月,高级作者(BS)在97例患者中完成了150个皮瓣。单侧DIEP(r=-0.73,p<0.05)和双侧DIEP(r=-0.67,p=0.14)的手术时间与病例数呈负相关。起病时间和缺血时间也与病例数呈负相关(分别为r=-0.82,p<0.05和r=-0.79,p<0.05)。有10例并发症,无皮瓣丢失。
    数据表明,随着经验的增加,手术效率有望提高。我们在我们的系列中描述了有助于效率的关键因素,如术前CT血管造影,手术前的手术标记,有三套透热疗法的两队方法,使用单极透热疗法提高皮瓣,偏爱选择单个优势射孔器,并尽早承诺选择射孔器。这个案例系列作为初级整形外科医生实现安全的指南,完成免费DIEP皮瓣乳房重建时的美学和有效结果。
    UNASSIGNED: The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) free flap is the gold-standard for breast reconstruction but is technically demanding, resource intensive and time-consuming, making it a daunting task for the junior surgeon.
    UNASSIGNED: To report the lessons learnt from the experience of a single surgeon performing their first 150 DIEP reconstructions as a guide for junior surgeons.
    UNASSIGNED: Data regarding patient demographics and surgical outcomes from April 2021 to October 2022 were collected retrospectively from medical records. Surgical outcomes were analysed using Microsoft Excel.
    UNASSIGNED: Over 17 months, 150 flaps were completed in 97 patients by the senior author (BS). Operative duration was negatively correlated with case number for unilateral DIEPs (r = -0.73, p < 0.05) and for bilateral DIEPs (r = -0.67, p = 0.14). Raise time and ischaemic time were also negatively correlated with case number (r = -0.82, p < 0.05 and r = -0.79, p < 0.05, respectively). There were 10 complications and no flap losses.
    UNASSIGNED: The data demonstrate an expected improvement in surgical efficiency with increased experience. We describe the key factors contributing to efficiency in our series, such as preoperative CT angiography, surgical markings prior to the day of surgery, a two-team approach with three diathermy sets, flap raise using monopolar diathermy, preference towards choosing a single dominant perforator and early commitment to perforator choice. This case series acts as a guide for the junior plastic surgeon in achieving safe, aesthetic and efficient results when completing free DIEP flap breast reconstructions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    最近,我们引入了一种名为"熟练程度评分"的创新工具来评估机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术(RARP)的学习曲线.然而,最初的研究仅针对不需要进行盆腔淋巴结清扫术(PLND)的低危前列腺癌患者.为了解决这个问题,我们旨在验证当代多中心队列高危前列腺癌患者的熟练程度评分,这些患者接受RARP加延长PLND治疗,由实习外科医生提供.
    在2010年至2020年之间,合并了4个意大利机构前列腺癌数据集,并查询了“RARP”和“高风险前列腺癌”。“根据最新的欧洲泌尿外科协会指南,高危前列腺癌的定义如下:前列腺特异性抗原>20ng/mL,国际泌尿外科病理学学会术前影像学≥4,和/或临床分期(cT)≥2c。所选择的队列(n=144)包括由实习外科医生(n=4)在完成他们的RARP学习曲线(50个低风险前列腺癌程序)后进行的临床病例。兴趣的结果,熟练程度得分,定义为以下所有标准的共存:与每个中心指导外科医生的四分位范围相当的手术时间,无任何重大围手术期并发症Clavien-Dindo3-5级,无围手术期输血,和阴性的手术切缘。建立了逻辑二元回归模型,以确定受训者队列中1年三连冠成绩的预测因素。对于所有统计分析,双侧p<0.05被认为是显著的。
    42.3%的患者达到熟练程度评分。在单一变量级别,熟练程度得分与1年三连冠成就相关(赔率比,8.77;95%置信区间,2.42-31.7;p=0.001)。在对年龄进行多变量调整后,保留神经,和手术技术,熟练程度得分独立预测1年三连冠成就(赔率比,9.58;95%置信区间,1.83-50.1;p=0.007)。
    我们的发现支持在患者中使用熟练程度评分,并且除了RARP外还需要延长PLND。
    UNASSIGNED: Recently, an innovative tool called \"proficiency score\" was introduced to assess the learning curve for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). However, the initial study only focused on patients with low-risk prostate cancer for whom pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) was not required. To address this issue, we aimed to validate proficiency scores of a contemporary multicenter cohort of patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated with RARP plus extended PLND by trainee surgeons.
    UNASSIGNED: Between 2010 and 2020, 4 Italian institutional prostate-cancer datasets were merged and queried for \"RARP\" and \"high-risk prostate cancer.\" High-risk prostate cancer was defined according to the most recent European Association of Urology guidelines as follows: prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL, International Society of Urological Pathology ≥4, and/or clinical stage (cT) ≥ 2c on preoperative imaging. The selected cohort (n = 144) included clinical cases performed by trainee surgeons (n = 4) after completing their RARP learning curve (50 procedures for low-risk prostate cancer). The outcome of interest, the proficiency score, was defined as the coexistence of all the following criteria: a comparable operation time to the interquartile range of the mentor surgeon at each center, absence of any significant perioperative complications Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-5, no perioperative blood transfusions, and negative surgical margins. A logistic binary regression model was built to identify the predictors of 1-year trifecta achievement in the trainee cohort. For all statistical analyses, a 2-sided p < 0.05 was considered significant.
    UNASSIGNED: A proficiency score was achieved in 42.3% patients. At univariable level, proficiency score was associated with 1-year trifecta achievement (odds ratio, 8.77; 95% confidence interval, 2.42-31.7; p = 0.001). After multivariable adjustments for age, nerve-sparing, and surgical technique, the proficiency score independently predicted 1-year trifecta achievement (odds ratio, 9.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.83-50.1; p = 0.007).
    UNASSIGNED: Our findings support the use of proficiency scores in patients and require extended PLND in addition to RARP.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    多年来,机器人手术经历了很大的发展并增加了使用;与当前护理标准的传统腹腔镜手术(CLS)的限制性更强相比,它为手术外科医生提供了许多好处。然而,据我们所知,没有研究试图在实现学习曲线所需的情况下对两者进行比较。系统评价在Barts癌症研究所进行。搜索Cochrane,PubMed和Embase于2024年3月15日制作。筛查和偏倚风险由两名审查员完成。筛选是由两名审查人员通过资格标准进行的。使用Excel进行数据收集(Microsoft®Corp.,雷德蒙德,美国),信息由另一位审阅者仔细检查,并转换为表格格式。包括17项研究,14项研究报告了学习曲线。实现多端口机器人胆囊切除术(MRC)和单部位机器人胆囊切除术(SSRC)的学习曲线所需的病例范围为16至134。从10到102多起。传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术(CLC)为7~200。手术时间的改善以非常不同的方式进行测量,并在17项研究中的10项研究中进行了报道。现有的研究具有高度的异质性,因此很难在研究之间进行比较。几项研究仅包括一名外科医生,导致外科医生的样本量太小并且容易受到偏见。由于机器人手术还是比较新颖的,必须进行更高质量的研究,才能对MRC和SSRC的学习曲线的好处得出更确凿的结论。
    Robotic surgery has undergone much development and increased use over the years; it has offered many benefits for the operating surgeon compared to the more restrictive nature of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) which is the current standard of care. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have attempted to draw a comparison between the two in terms of the cases required for the learning curve to be achieved. The systematic review was performed at Barts Cancer Institute. A search of Cochrane, PubMed and Embase was made on 15 March 2024. Screening and risk of bias were done by two reviewers. Screening was done via the eligibility criteria by two reviewers. Data collection was done using Excel (Microsoft® Corp., Redmond, USA) and information was double-checked by another reviewer and transferred into a tabulated format. Seventeen studies were included, with the learning curve reported in 14 studies. The cases required to achieve the learning curve for multiport robotic cholecystectomy (MRC) ranged from 16 to 134 and for single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC), it ranged from 10 to over 102 cases. Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) was from 7 to 200. The improvement in operating times was measured in very different ways and was reported in 10 of the 17 studies. The studies that were available had a high level of heterogeneity making it difficult for comparisons to be made between studies. Several studies included only one surgeon resulting in the sample size of surgeons being too small and vulnerable to bias. As robotic surgery is still relatively novel, higher-quality studies have to be made in order for more conclusive conclusions to be made on the benefits of the learning curve of MRC and SSRC.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号