Abstract
Purpose
To design and validate a new and cost-effective animal tissue model for training neonatal minimal access surgery (MAS) skills.
Methods
A prospective observational study was performed during two Minimally Access Surgery Skill Labs in June 2018 and April 2019. Selected laparoscopic exercises were performed on fresh chicken cadavers using 3 mm MAS instruments (adhesiolysis, cholecystectomy and intestinal anastomosis). Data for validation were collected with a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire based on the Michigan Standard Simulation Experience Scale (MiSSES) and analysis was performed.
Results
Twenty-seven course participants were recruited (18 females: 9 males). Eighteen delegates (67%) had experience < 50 MAS cases, 6 delegates (22%) 50–100 cases and 3 delegates (11%) > 100 cases. The mean perceived degree of realism was 3.85 ± 0.99, and for abdominal cavity 4.00 ± 1.25, port placement 3.52 ± 1.40, pneumoperitoneum creation 3.59 ± 1.39, camera manipulation 4.07 ± 1.09, instrument manipulation 4.44 ± 1.13, tissue dissection 4.11 ± 0.99 and intracorporal suturing and knot tying 4.22 ± 1.37. The perceived degree of improvement of understanding MAS basics was 4.65 ± 0.55, knowledge 4.15 ± 1.11, confidence and ability 4.15 ± 1.11. The overall satisfaction with the avian model was 4.64 ± 0.56.
Conclusion
The novel avian tissue model for neonatal MAS training could be validated with success. Validation assessment demonstrates that this model is very realistic and effective, making it possible to gain laparoscopic skills especially with intracorporeal suturing and knot tying in a small space. The avian model is a proven and cost-efficient simulator for neonatal MAS training and expands the spectrum of already established simulation models for pediatric surgeons.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Lacher M, Kuebler JF, Dingemann J, Ure BM (2014) Minimal invasive surgery in the newborn: current status and evidence. Semin Pediatr Surg 23:249–256
Porter DJ, Ross G, Yung D, Payne C, Tang B (2018) Design and validation of a novel and cost-effective animal tissue model for training laparoscopic adhesiolysis and mesh repair of an incisional hernia. World J Surg Surg Res 1:1–5
Reznick RK, MacRae H (2006) Teaching surgical skills-changes in the wind. N Engl J Med 355:2664–2669
Esposito C, Escolino M, Draghici I et al (2016) Training models in pediatric minimally invasive surgery: rabbit model versus porcine model: a comparative study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 26:79–84
Badash I, Burtt K, Solorzano CA et al (2016) Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques. Ann Transl Med. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.12.24
Seagull FJ, Rooney DM (2014) Filling a void: developing a standard subjective assessment tool for surgical simulation through focused review of current practices. Surgery 156:718–722
Gause CD, Grace H, Ben S et al (2016) Advances in pediatric surgical education: a critical appraisal of two consecutive minimally invasive pediatric surgery training courses. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:663–670
Nair D, Wells JM, Cook N et al (2019) Critical design and validation considerations for the development of neonatal minimally invasive surgery simulators. J Pediatr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.05.022
Azzie G, Gerstle JT, Nasr A et al (2011) Development and validation of a pediatric laparoscopic surgery simulator. J Pediatr Surg 46:897–903
de Montbrun SL, MacRae H (2012) Simulation in surgical education. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 25:156–165
McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER et al (2010) A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ 44:50–63
Schwab B, Hungness E, Barsness KA et al (2017) The role of simulation in surgical education. J of Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 27:450–454
Ganpule A, Chhabra JS, Desai M (2015) Chicken and porcine models for training in laparoscopy and robotics. Curr Opin Urol 25:158–162
Li MM, George J (2017) A systematic review of low-cost laparoscopic simulators. Surg Endosc 31:38–48
Nagendran M, Gurusamy KS, Aggarwal R, Loizidou M, Davidson BR (2013) Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006575.pub3
Nagendran M, Toon CD, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS (2014) Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with no prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010479
Gurusamy KS, Nagendran M, Toon CD, Davidson BR (2014) Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with limited prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858CD010478.pub2
Zimmerman H, Latifi R, Dehdashti B et al (2011) Intensive laparoscopic training course for surgical residents: program description, initial results and requirements. Surg Endosc 25:3636–3641
La Torre M, Caruso C (2013) The animal model in advanced laparoscopy resident training. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 23:271–275
Van Bruwaena S, Schijven MP, Napolitano D, De Win G, Miserez M (2015) Porcine cadaver organ or virtual reality simulation training for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized-controller trial. J Surg Educ 72:483–490
Ramachandran A, Kurien A, Patil P et al (2008) A novel training model for laparoscopic pyeloplasty using chicken crop. J Endourol 22:725–728
Laguna MP, Arce-Alcazar A, Mochtar CA et al (2006) Construct validity of the chicken model in the simulation of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy suture. J Endourol 20:69–73
Singh AG, Jai SJ, Ganpule AP, Vijayakumar M, Sabnis RB, Desai MR (2018) Face, content, and construct validity of a novel chicken model for laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation. Indian J Urol 34:189–195
McGougall EM (2007) Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol 21:244–247
Van Nortwick SS, Lendvay T, Jensen A, Wright AS, Horvath KD, Kim S (2010) Methodologies for establishing validity in surgical simulation studies. Surgery 147:622–630
Schout BM, Hendrikx A, Scheele F et al (2010) Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future. Surg Endosc 24:536–546
Salkini MW, Doarn CR, Kiehl N et al (2010) The role of haptic feedback in laparoscopic training using the LapMentor II. J Endourol 24:99–102
Retrosi G, Cundy T, Haddad M et al (2015) Motion analysis-based skills training and assessment in pediatric laparoscopy: construct, concurrent, and content validity for the eoSim simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25:944–950
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or living animals performed by any of the authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zimmermann, P., Wiseman, A.X., Sanchez, O. et al. The avian model: a novel and cost-effective animal tissue model for training in neonatal laparoscopic surgery. J Ped Endosc Surg 1, 99–105 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42804-019-00027-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42804-019-00027-8