• Christoph Kuemmerli, Johannes M A Toti, Fabian Haak, Adrian T Billeter, Felix Nickel, Cristiano Guidetti, Martin Santibanes, Luca Vigano, Joël L Lavanchy, Otto Kollmar, Daniel Seehofer, Mohammed Abu Hilal, Fabrizio Di Benedetto, Pierre-Alain Clavien, Philipp Dutkowski, Beat P Müller, and Philip C Müller.
• Department of Surgery, Clarunis - University Centre for Gastrointestinal and Hepatopancreatobiliary Diseases, Basel, Switzerland.
• Ann. Surg. 2024 Jun 26.

ObjectiveThe aim was to analyze the learning curves of minimal invasive liver surgery(MILS) and propose a standardized reporting.Summary Background DataMILS offers benefits compared to open resections. For a safe introduction along the learning curve, formal training is recommended. However, definitions of learning curves and methods to assess it lack standardization.MethodsA systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in MILS. The primary outcome was the number needed to overcome the learning curve. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, and characterization of different learning phases(competency, proficiency and mastery).Results60 articles with 12'241 patients and 102 learning curve analyses were included. The laparoscopic and robotic approach was evaluated in 71 and 18 analyses and both approaches combined in 13 analyses. Sixty-one analyses (60%) based the learning curve on statistical calculations. The most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n=64), blood loss (n=54), conversion (n=42) and postoperative complications (n=38). Overall competency, proficiency and mastery were reached after 34 (IQR 19-56), 50 (IQR 24-74), 58 (IQR 24-100) procedures respectively. Intraoperative parameters improved earlier (operative time: competency to proficiency to mastery: -13%, 2%; blood loss: competency to proficiency to mastery: -33%, 0%; conversion rate (competency to proficiency to mastery; -21%, -29%), whereas postoperative complications improved later (competency to proficiency to mastery: -25%, -41%).ConclusionsThis review summarizes the highest evidence on learning curves in MILS taking into account different definitions and confounding factors. A standardized three-phase reporting of learning phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is proposed and should be followed.Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

8 keywords...

hide…