The Feasibility, Proficiency, and Mastery Learning Curves in 635 Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomies Following a Multicenter Training Program

Author:

Zwart Maurice J.W.12,van den Broek Bram3,de Graaf Nine124,Suurmeijer José A.12,Augustinus Simone12,te Riele Wouter W.5,van Santvoort Hjalmar C.5,Hagendoorn Jeroen5,Borel Rinkes Inne H.M.5,van Dam Jacob L.3,Takagi Kosei3,Tran Khé T.C.3,Schreinemakers Jennifer6,van der Schelling George6,Wijsman Jan H.6,de Wilde Roeland F.3,Festen Sebastiaan7,Daams Freek12,Luyer Misha D.8,de Hingh Ignace H.J.T.8,Mieog Jan S.D.9,Bonsing Bert A.9,Lips Daan J.10,Abu Hilal Mohamed411,Busch Olivier R.12,Saint-Marc Olivier12,Zeh Herbert J.13,Zureikat Amer H.14,Hogg Melissa E.15,Koerkamp Bas G.3,Molenaar Isaac Q.5,Besselink Marc G.12,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

2. Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

3. Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

4. Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Institute, Brescia, Italy

5. Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands

6. Department of Surgery, Amphia Medical Center, Breda, the Netherlands

7. Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

8. Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands

9. Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands

10. Department of Surgery, Twente Medical Spectrum, Enschede, the Netherlands

11. Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

12. Department of Surgery, Orleans Regional Medical Center, Orleans, France

13. Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, TX

14. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA

15. Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL

Abstract

Objective: To assess the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in “second-generation” RPD centers following a multicenter training program adhering to the IDEAL framework. Background: The long learning curves for RPD reported from “pioneering” expert centers may discourage centers interested in starting an RPD program. However, the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves may be shorter in “second-generation” centers that participated in dedicated RPD training programs, although data are lacking. We report on the learning curves for RPD in “second-generation” centers trained in a dedicated nationwide program. Methods: Post hoc analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing RPD in 7 centers that participated in the LAELAPS-3 training program, each with a minimum annual volume of 50 pancreatoduodenectomies, using the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (March 2016–December 2021). Cumulative sum analysis determined cutoffs for the 3 learning curves: operative time for the feasibility (1) risk-adjusted major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) for the proficiency, (2) and textbook outcome for the mastery, (3) learning curve. Outcomes before and after the cutoffs were compared for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. A survey was used to assess changes in practice and the most valued “lessons learned.” Results: Overall, 635 RPD were performed by 17 trained surgeons, with a conversion rate of 6.6% (n=42). The median annual volume of RPD per center was 22.5±6.8. From 2016 to 2021, the nationwide annual use of RPD increased from 0% to 23% whereas the use of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy decreased from 15% to 0%. The rate of major complications was 36.9% (n=234), surgical site infection 6.3% (n=40), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) 26.9% (n=171), and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 3.5% (n=22). Cutoffs for the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves were reached at 15, 62, and 84 RPD. Major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly before and after the cutoffs for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. Previous experience in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy shortened the feasibility (−12 RPDs, −44%), proficiency (−32 RPDs, −34%), and mastery phase learning curve (−34 RPDs, −23%), but did not improve clinical outcome. Conclusions: The feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for RPD at 15, 62, and 84 procedures in “second-generation” centers after a multicenter training program were considerably shorter than previously reported from “pioneering” expert centers. The learning curve cutoffs and prior laparoscopic experience did not impact major morbidity and mortality. These findings demonstrate the safety and value of a nationwide training program for RPD in centers with sufficient volume.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3