Current Standards for Training in Robot-assisted Surgery and Endourology: A Systematic Review

Background and objective: Different training programs have been developed to improve trainee outcomes in urology. However, evidence on the optimal training methodology is sparse. Our aim was to provide a comprehensive description of the training programs available for urological robotic surgery and endourology, assess their validity, and highlight the fundamental elements of future training pathways. Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The validity of each training model was assessed. The methodological quality of studies on metrics and curricula was graded using the MERSQI scale. The level of evidence (LoE) and level of recommendation for surgical curricula were awarded using the educational Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification. Key findings and limitations: A total of 75 studies were identified. Many simulators have been developed to aid trainees in mastering skills required for both robotic and endourology procedures, but only four demonstrated predictive validity. For assessment of trainee proficiency, we identified 18 in robotics training and six in endourology training; however, the majority are Likert-type scales. Although proficiency-based progression (PBP) curricula demonstrated superior outcomes to traditional training in preclinical settings, only four of six (67%) in robotics and three of nine (33%) in endourology are PBP-based. Among these, the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery and the SIMULATE curricula have the highest LoE (level 1b). The lack of a quantitative synthesis is the main limitation of our study. Conclusions and clinical implications: Training curricula that integrate simulators and PBP methodology have been introduced to standardize trainee outcomes in robotics and endourology. However, evidence regarding their educational impact remains restricted to preclinical studies. Efforts should be made to expand these training programs to different surgical procedures and assess their clinical impact . (c) 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.