Simulation for Percutaneous Renal Access: Where Are We?

被引:23
作者
Noureldin, Yasser A. [1 ,2 ]
Andonian, Sero [1 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Div Urol, 1001 Blvd Decarie,Suite D05-5331, Montreal, PQ H4A 3J1, Canada
[2] Benha Univ, Benha Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Banha, Egypt
来源
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY | 2017年 / 31卷
关键词
percutaneous nephrolithotomy; computer simulation; clinical skills; outcome and process assessment; VIRTUAL-REALITY SIMULATOR; VIVO ORGAN MODEL; SURGICAL SKILLS; LEARNING-CURVE; OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT; COLLECTING SYSTEM; MEDICAL-EDUCATION; TECHNICAL SKILLS; TRAINING MODEL; NEPHROLITHOTOMY;
D O I
10.1089/end.2016.0587
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives: Percutaneous renal access (PCA) is a challenging step during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The aim of this study is to review the literature for different types of simulators described for PCA. Methods: Databases of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, OvidSP, and Google Scholar were systematically searched until May 2016. The studies were analyzed regarding the type of simulator (nonbiologic, biologic, live animal, and virtual reality [VR]), type of validity (face, content, construct, and predictive), cost-effectiveness, and whether these simulators have been used for training and/or assessment of PCA. In addition, the study looked at the educational impact of these simulators in terms of the transfer of PCA skills to the operating room. Results: Several bench, animal, andVR simulators for training in PCAwere identified. Only few studieswere found on assessment of PCAskills. Biological benchmodels used porcine or bovine kidneys wrappedwithin foam, silicone, chicken carcass, or full-thickness skin flap alone. Other biological models used additional subcutaneous fascia, muscle, or ribs. Nonbiological models used prototypes, including 3D printing. Only one study reported the use of anesthetized live pig for training. The PERC Mentor (TM) was the only VR simulator, which has been validated for training and assessment of PCA skills. However, none of these studies assessed the educational impact of PCA simulators. Furthermore, most of the studies did not address the validity and the cost of the simulator. Conclusions: While several biological and nonbiological PCA models exist, there is paucity of literature regarding the validity and educational impact of these simulators. The PERC Mentor simulator is the sole validated simulator for training and assessment of PCA skills. However, it is expensive and there is little evidence of its educational impact. Therefore, more research is needed to validate the available simulators and assess their educational impact for urology trainees.
引用
收藏
页码:S10 / S19
页数:10
相关论文
共 62 条
  • [21] PCNL in the twenty-first century: role of Microperc, Miniperc, and Ultraminiperc
    Ganpule, Arvind P.
    Bhattu, Amit Satish
    Desai, Mahesh
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 33 (02) : 235 - 240
  • [22] Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Update, Trends, and Future Directions
    Ghani, Khurshid R.
    Andonian, Sero
    Bultitude, Matthew
    Desai, Mihir
    Giusti, Guido
    Okhunov, Zhamshid
    Preminger, Glenn M.
    de la Rosette, Jean
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 70 (02) : 382 - 396
  • [23] Operative experience of urological trainees in the UK
    Gill, Jonathan D.
    Stewart, Lianne F.
    George, Nicholas J. R.
    Eardley, Ian
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 109 (09) : 1296 - 1301
  • [24] Palliative cytoreductive surgery versus other palliative treatments in patients with unresectable liver metastases from gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours
    Gurusamy, Kurinchi Selvan
    Pamecha, Viniyendra
    Sharma, Dinesh
    Davidson, Brian R.
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2009, (01):
  • [25] A biological model to teach percutaneous nephrolithotomy technique with ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided access
    Haecker, Axel
    Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar
    Honeck, Patrick
    Michel, M. S.
    Alken, Peter
    Knoll, Thomas
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2007, 21 (05) : 545 - 550
  • [26] A new approach to urology training: A laboratory model for percutaneous nephrolithotomy
    Hammond, L
    Ketchum, J
    Schwartz, BF
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 172 (05) : 1950 - 1952
  • [27] New Ex-vivo Organ Model for Percutaneous Renal Surgery
    Imkamp, Florian
    von Klot, Christoph
    Nagele, Udo
    Herrmann, Thomas R. W.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2011, 37 (03): : 388 - 394
  • [28] The Learning Curve for Flank Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Calculi: A Single Surgeon's Experience
    Jang, Won Sik
    Choi, Kyung Hwa
    Yang, Seung Choul
    Han, Woong Kyu
    [J]. KOREAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 52 (04) : 284 - 288
  • [29] New ex vivo organ model for percutaneous renal surgery using a laparoendoscopic training box: the sandwich model
    Jutzi, Stephan
    Imkamp, Florian
    Kuczyk, Markus A.
    Walcher, Ute
    Nagele, Udo
    Herrmann, Thomas R. W.
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 32 (03) : 783 - 789
  • [30] Modular training for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy: The safe way to go
    Kallidonis, Panagiotis
    Kyriazis, Iason
    Vasilas, Marinos
    Panagopoulos, Vasilis
    Georgiopoulos, Ioannis
    Ozsoy, Mehmet
    Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
    Seitz, Christian
    Liatsikos, Evangelos
    [J]. ARAB JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 13 (04) : 270 - 276