Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Jun;38(6):3346-3352.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10860-5. Epub 2024 May 1.

Laparoscopic vs robotic inguinal hernia repair: a comparison of learning curves and skill transference in general surgery residents

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Laparoscopic vs robotic inguinal hernia repair: a comparison of learning curves and skill transference in general surgery residents

Kristen M Quinn et al. Surg Endosc. 2024 Jun.

Abstract

Background: There is no consensus on whether laparoscopic experience should be a prerequisite for robotic training. Further, there is limited information on skill transference between laparoscopic and robotic techniques. This study focused on the general surgery residents' learning curve and skill transference within the two minimally invasive platforms.

Methods: General surgery residents were observed during the performance of laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repairs. The recorded data included objective measures (operative time, resident participation indicated by percent active time on console or laparoscopy relative to total case time, number of handoffs between the resident and attending), and subjective evaluations (preceptor and trainee assessments of operative performance) while controlling for case complexity, patient comorbidities, and residents' prior operative experience. Wilcoxon two-sample tests and Pearson Correlation coefficients were used for analysis.

Results: Twenty laparoscopic and forty-four robotic cases were observed. Mean operative times were 90 min for robotic and 95 min for laparoscopic cases (P = 0.4590). Residents' active participation time was 66% on the robotic platform and 37% for laparoscopic (P = < 0.0001). On average, hand-offs occurred 9.7 times during robotic cases and 6.3 times during laparoscopic cases (P = 0.0131). The mean number of cases per resident was 5.86 robotic and 1.67 laparoscopic (P = 0.0312). For robotic cases, there was a strong correlation between percent active resident participation and their prior robotic experience (r = 0.78) while there was a weaker correlation with prior laparoscopic experience (r = 0.47). On the other hand, prior robotic experience had minimal correlation with the percent active resident participation in laparoscopic cases (r = 0.12) and a weak correlation with prior laparoscopic experience (r = 0.37).

Conclusion: The robotic platform may be a more effective teaching tool with a higher degree of entrustability indicated by the higher mean resident participation. We observed a greater degree of skill transference from laparoscopy to the robot, indicated by a higher degree of correlation between the resident's prior laparoscopic experience and the percent console time in robotic cases. There was minimal correlation between residents' prior robotic experience and their participation in laparoscopic cases. Our findings suggest that the learning curve for the robot may be shorter as prior robotic experience had a much stronger association with future robotic performance compared to the association observed in laparoscopy.

Keywords: Laparoscopic; Operative autonomy; Robotic; Surgical education; Trainee curriculum.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lu J, Zheng CH, Xu BB, Xie JW, Wang JB, Lin JX, Chen QY, Cao LL, Lin M, Tu RH, Huang ZN, Lin JL, Zheng HL, Huang CM, Li P (2021) Assessment of robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 273(5):858–867. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004466 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lee J, Kim YM, Woo Y, Obama K, Noh SH, Hyung WJ (2015) Robotic distal subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer patients with high body mass index: comparison with conventional laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. Surg Endosc 29(11):3251–3260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4069-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Park JM, Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, Kim YW, Lee HJ, An JY, Kim MC, Park S, Song KY, Oh SJ, Kong SH, Suh BJ, Yang DH, Ha TK, Hyung WJ, Ryu KW (2016) Who may benefit from robotic gastrectomy?: A subgroup analysis of multicenter prospective comparative study data on robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol 42(12):1944–1949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.07.012 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tom CM, Maciel JD, Korn A, Ozao-Choy JJ, Hari DM, Neville AL, de Virgilio C, Dauphine C (2019) A survey of robotic surgery training curricula in general surgery residency programs: how close are we to a standardized curriculum? Am J Surg 217(2):256–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Madion MP, Kastenmeier A, Goldblatt MI, Higgins RM (2022) Robotic surgery training curricula: prevalence, perceptions, and educational experiences in general surgery residency programs. Surg Endosc 36(9):6638–6646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08930-z - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources