What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery?

STUDY OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to estimate the learning curve when using the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) in benign gynecologic cases by a team of 2 gynecologic laparoscopists. DESIGN Retrospective case series (Canadian Task Force classification II-1). SETTING A private practice obstetrics/gynecology clinic. PATIENTS Patients requiring major benign gynecologic surgery who were candidates for a laparoscopic approach. INTERVENTION All patients who would have otherwise been offered a transabdominal or conventional laparoscopic procedure were offered the option of having their procedure performed laparoscopically with robotic assistance. Data that were collected included robot set-up times by the operative room staff, operative times for use of robot, total operative times, and perioperative outcome. We analyzed the learning curve defined as the number of cases required to stabilize operative time to perform the various procedures. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS One hundred thirteen patients were treated over a 22-month period with the da Vinci Surgical System. Most procedures were hysterectomies, whereas other gynecologic procedures included supracervical hysterectomy, laparoscopic vaginal assisted hysterectomy, myomectomy, sacrocolpopexy, and oophorectomy. Total operative times for hysterectomies studied sequentially stabilized at approximately 95 minutes after 50 cases. The decrease in robotic time did not depend on uterine size. The mean length of hospital stay was 24 hours, and return to normal activities averaged 2.8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS Robotic assisted surgery is an enabling technology that allows gynecologic surgeons the ability to offer laparoscopic procedures to most of their patients. In the hands of surgeons with advanced laparoscopic skills, the learning curve to stabilize operative times for the various surgical procedures in women requiring benign gynecolologic interventions is 50 cases.

[1]  R Kevin Reynolds,et al.  Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. , 2004, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[2]  R. Satava,et al.  Robotic surgery: identifying the learning curve through objective measurement of skill , 2003, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[3]  G. Caravaglios,et al.  Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. , 2003, Archives of surgery.

[4]  Vipul R Patel,et al.  Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting--the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases. , 2005, The Journal of urology.

[5]  Christopher J. Martin,et al.  Virtual reality simulators: Current status in acquisition and assessment of surgical skills , 2002, ANZ journal of surgery.

[6]  Ashutosh Tewari,et al.  Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills. , 2004, Journal of endourology.

[7]  B. Hurst,et al.  Laparoscopic myomectomy for symptomatic uterine myomas. , 2005, Fertility and sterility.

[8]  R. Garry,et al.  Laparoscopic Hysterectomy , 1999, Seminars in laparoscopic surgery.

[9]  A. Darzi,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the learning curve of a simulated surgical task on the da Vinci system , 2004, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[10]  H. Reich,et al.  Laparoscopic Treatment of Ruptured Interstitial Pregnancy , 1990 .

[11]  H. Sim,et al.  Re: Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[12]  R. Wolterbeek,et al.  Implementation of advanced laparoscopy into daily gynecologic practice: difficulties and solutions. , 2006, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[13]  T. N. Payne,et al.  A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. , 2008, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[14]  C. Steiner,et al.  Hysterectomy Rates in the United States 1990–1997 , 2002, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[15]  R Kevin Reynolds,et al.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and initial experience. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[16]  James A. Young,et al.  Robotic Surgical Training in an Academic Institution , 2001, Annals of surgery.

[17]  T. Ahlering,et al.  Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. , 2003, The Journal of urology.

[18]  Simulators: a New Use for an Old Paradigm , 2006, JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons.

[19]  S. Horgan,et al.  A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures , 2003, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[20]  C. Meistelman,et al.  Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign and oncologic pathologies: initial clinical experience with 30 patients , 2005, Surgical Endoscopy.

[21]  M. Rettenmaier,et al.  Pilot study assessing robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy and patient outcomes. , 2006, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[22]  J. Boggess,et al.  Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: evolution of a new surgical paradigm , 2007, Journal of robotic surgery.

[23]  L Bren,et al.  Alternatives to hysterectomy. New technologies, more options. , 2001, FDA consumer.

[24]  S Duke Herrell,et al.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: what is the learning curve? , 2005, Urology.

[25]  Keith H. Nelson,et al.  Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Utilizing a Robotic Surgical System , 2005, JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons.

[26]  J. Lenihan,et al.  Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with traditional hysterectomy for cost-effectiveness to employers. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  J. Boggess,et al.  Current applications of laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology: A literature review , 2005 .