Four different models for simulation-based training of bronchoscopic procedures.

backgroundFlexible bronchoscopy procedures require detailed anatomical knowledge and advanced technical skills. Simulation-based training offers a patient-safe training environment that can be more efficient than patient-based training. Physical models are cheaper than virtual reality simulators and allow trainees to be acquainted with the equipment used in the clinic. The choice of a physical model for training depends on the local context. The aim of this study was to compare four different bronchoscopy models for flexible bronchoscopy training.

methodsThe BronchoBoy manikin, the Koken manikin, a human cadaver, and a preserved porcine lung were included in the study. Seven physicians experienced in bronchoscopy performed a bronchoscopic airway inspection, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and tissue sampling on all four models with performance evaluated by observation and participant evaluation of models by questionnaire.

resultsNineteen segments were identified in all human anatomy models, and the only significant difference found was that only the Thiel embedded cadaver allowed all participants to enter RB1 with an instrument in the working channel (p = 0.001). The Thiel embedded cadaver and the BronchoBoy manikin had low fluid return on BAL (22 and 52 ml), whereas the Koken manikin and the preserved porcine lung had high return (132 and 134 ml), (p = 0.017). Tissue samplings were only completed in the preserved porcine lung and the Thiel embedded cadaver (p < 0.001).

conclusionsAn anatomically correct bronchoscopy is best simulated with the Koken manikin or the Thiel embedded cadaver. Bronchoalveolar lavage should be simulated with the Koken manikin or the preserved porcine lung. Tissue sampling procedures are best simulated using the Thiel embedded cadaver or the preserved porcine lung.