{"title":"初级外科医生的微创胰十二指肠切除术:下一代的初步经验。","authors":"Sung Hyun Kim, Seung-Soo Hong, Chang Moo Kang","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nSeveral guidelines exist for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) regarding its prerequisites and learning curve. However, these guidelines are based on the experience of the pioneers of MIPD; minimal data exist on the experience of the next generation of surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the two surgeon types (veteran and junior) for MIPD in terms of immediate postoperative outcomes.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe postoperative outcomes of 22 patients who underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) by a junior surgeon from July 2021 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes were compared with the initial postoperative outcomes and the contemporary postoperative outcomes of RAPD by a veteran surgeon.\n\n\nRESULTS\nIn comparing the initial outcomes between the two surgeon types, the veteran surgeons showed a shorter operation time (junior surgeon vs. veteran surgeon: 606 ± 89 vs. 467 ± 77 min, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcomes, such as blood loss (300 [200-600] ml. vs. 200 [100-500] ml, p = 0.208), major complications (≥CDC IIIa: 4 (18.2%) vs. 4 (18.2%), p = 1.000), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF; ≥ISGPF Grade B: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (13.6%), p > 0.999), and length of hospital stay (18.0 ± 8.9 days vs. 18.3 ± 7.9 days, p = 0.915), between the two surgeon types. In addition, in a comparison of the contemporary outcomes, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcome (complications: 4 (18.2%) vs 11 (11.1%), p = 0.580; POPF: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (3.0%), p = 0.484; length of hospital stay: 18.0 ± 8.9 vs. 15.0 ± 6.5 days, p = 0.065).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nThe initial outcomes of MIPD by a well-trained junior surgeon were found to be comparable to those of MIPD by a veteran surgeon.","PeriodicalId":507313,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":"47 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy by junior surgeon: Initial experience of the next generation.\",\"authors\":\"Sung Hyun Kim, Seung-Soo Hong, Chang Moo Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wjs.12178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nSeveral guidelines exist for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) regarding its prerequisites and learning curve. However, these guidelines are based on the experience of the pioneers of MIPD; minimal data exist on the experience of the next generation of surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the two surgeon types (veteran and junior) for MIPD in terms of immediate postoperative outcomes.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nThe postoperative outcomes of 22 patients who underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) by a junior surgeon from July 2021 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes were compared with the initial postoperative outcomes and the contemporary postoperative outcomes of RAPD by a veteran surgeon.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nIn comparing the initial outcomes between the two surgeon types, the veteran surgeons showed a shorter operation time (junior surgeon vs. veteran surgeon: 606 ± 89 vs. 467 ± 77 min, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcomes, such as blood loss (300 [200-600] ml. vs. 200 [100-500] ml, p = 0.208), major complications (≥CDC IIIa: 4 (18.2%) vs. 4 (18.2%), p = 1.000), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF; ≥ISGPF Grade B: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (13.6%), p > 0.999), and length of hospital stay (18.0 ± 8.9 days vs. 18.3 ± 7.9 days, p = 0.915), between the two surgeon types. In addition, in a comparison of the contemporary outcomes, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcome (complications: 4 (18.2%) vs 11 (11.1%), p = 0.580; POPF: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (3.0%), p = 0.484; length of hospital stay: 18.0 ± 8.9 vs. 15.0 ± 6.5 days, p = 0.065).\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nThe initial outcomes of MIPD by a well-trained junior surgeon were found to be comparable to those of MIPD by a veteran surgeon.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"47 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景关于微创胰十二指肠切除术(MIPD)的先决条件和学习曲线,目前已有多项指南。然而,这些指南都是基于微创胰十二指肠切除术先驱的经验,关于新一代外科医生经验的数据极少。方法回顾性分析了2021年7月至2022年12月期间由一名初级外科医生接受机器人辅助胰十二指肠切除术(RAPD)的22名患者的术后结果。结果在比较两类外科医生的初始结果时,老外科医生的手术时间更短(初级外科医生 vs. 初级外科医生:606 ± 202),而初级外科医生的手术时间更长(初级外科医生 vs. 初级外科医生:606 ± 202),而老外科医生的手术时间更长(老外科医生 vs. 初级外科医生:606 ± 202)。606±89分钟 vs. 467±77分钟,P 0.999)和住院时间(18.0±8.9天 vs. 18.3±7.9天,P = 0.915)。此外,在当代结果的比较中,两种外科医生在术后结果方面没有显著差异(并发症:4 例(18.2%)对 11 例(18.2%)):结论由训练有素的初级外科医生进行 MIPD 的初始疗效与由资深外科医生进行 MIPD 的疗效相当。
Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy by junior surgeon: Initial experience of the next generation.
BACKGROUND
Several guidelines exist for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) regarding its prerequisites and learning curve. However, these guidelines are based on the experience of the pioneers of MIPD; minimal data exist on the experience of the next generation of surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the two surgeon types (veteran and junior) for MIPD in terms of immediate postoperative outcomes.
METHODS
The postoperative outcomes of 22 patients who underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) by a junior surgeon from July 2021 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes were compared with the initial postoperative outcomes and the contemporary postoperative outcomes of RAPD by a veteran surgeon.
RESULTS
In comparing the initial outcomes between the two surgeon types, the veteran surgeons showed a shorter operation time (junior surgeon vs. veteran surgeon: 606 ± 89 vs. 467 ± 77 min, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcomes, such as blood loss (300 [200-600] ml. vs. 200 [100-500] ml, p = 0.208), major complications (≥CDC IIIa: 4 (18.2%) vs. 4 (18.2%), p = 1.000), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF; ≥ISGPF Grade B: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (13.6%), p > 0.999), and length of hospital stay (18.0 ± 8.9 days vs. 18.3 ± 7.9 days, p = 0.915), between the two surgeon types. In addition, in a comparison of the contemporary outcomes, there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative outcome (complications: 4 (18.2%) vs 11 (11.1%), p = 0.580; POPF: 2 (9.1%) vs. 3 (3.0%), p = 0.484; length of hospital stay: 18.0 ± 8.9 vs. 15.0 ± 6.5 days, p = 0.065).
CONCLUSION
The initial outcomes of MIPD by a well-trained junior surgeon were found to be comparable to those of MIPD by a veteran surgeon.