ArticleAsian journal of endoscopic surgery2022
Training on a virtual reality laparoscopic simulator improves performance of live laparoscopic surgery.
Article in Asian journal of endoscopic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- From visualization to education: the role of 3D-Printed and virtual kidney models in training for renal cancer surgery, a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Learning curve of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Review
- Evaluating the ergonomic aspects of laparoscopic energy devices: combination of a survey and a kinesiologic experiment.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Driven Training in Laparoscopic Suturing: A Systematic Review of Skills Mastery, Retention, and Clinical Performance in Surgical Education.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Objective assessment of laparoscopic targeting skills using a Short-Time Power of Difference (STPOD) method.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2022Article
- Training on a virtual reality laparoscopic simulator improves performance of live laparoscopic surgery.Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo determine whether training laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) with a virtual reality (VR) simulator improves the performance of porcine LN.
methodsTwelve urological residents were assigned to two groups: a training and a non-training group. All participants performed baseline assessments of LN skills and time on the LapPASS® simulator. The training group received preoperative LapPASS® training. Both groups then performed LN using a porcine model. The operations were videotaped and evaluated using the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) system. After porcine LN, the training group performed a final LN with the LapPASS® simulator.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the operation time required for porcine LN. There were no significant differences in the total A (autonomy), B (bimanual dexterity), D (depth perception), or T (tissue handling) GOALS scores. However, the total E (efficiency) score in the training group was higher than that in the non-training group (P = .030). The final LN score with LapPASS® was significantly higher than the baseline (P = .004).
conclusionsThe results of this study demonstrated that VR LN training improved performance in an actual operation. VR-based procedural simulation could become a vital part of the laparoscopic training program for residents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.