Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38279975›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Current practice and unmet training needs in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: investigation from the Junior ERUS/YAU working group.

Marcio Covas Moschovas, Carlo Andrea Bravi, Paolo Dell'Oglio, Filippo Turri, Ruben de Groote, Nikolaos Liakos, Mike Wenzel, Christoph Würnschimmel, Fabrizio Di Maida, Federico Piramide and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Marcio Covas MoschovasAdventHealth Global Robotics Institute, 380 Celebration Pl Suite 401, Celebration, FL, 34747, USA. Marcio.doc@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3290-7323
Carlo Andrea BraviDepartment of Urology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Paolo Dell'OglioASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Filippo TurriASST Santi Paolo e Carlo - La Statale University, Milan, Italy.
Ruben de GrooteDepartment of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Nikolaos LiakosUniversity of Freiburg Medical Centre, Freiburg, Germany.
Mike WenzelUniversity Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Christoph WürnschimmelLuzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland.
Fabrizio Di MaidaUniversity of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Federico PiramideUniversity of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Iulia AndrasIuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca-Napoca, Romania.
Alberto BredaAutonoma University of Barcelona at Fundacio Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain.
Alexandre MottrieDepartment of Urology, OLV Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Vipul PatelAdventHealth Global Robotics Institute, 380 Celebration Pl Suite 401, Celebration, FL, 34747, USA.
Alessandro LarcherSan Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Junior ERUS-YAU Working Group Robotic in Urology

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo access the current scenario of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy training in multiple centers worldwide.

methodsWe created a multiple-choice questionnaire assessing all details of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy training with 41 questions divided into three different categories (responder demography, surgical steps, and responder experience). The questionnaire was created and disseminated using the "Google Docs" platform. All responders had an individual invitation by direct message or Email. We selected urologists who had recently finished a postgraduation urologic robotic surgery training (fellowship) in the last five years. We sent 624 invitations to urologists from 138 centers, from January 10th to April 10th, 2022. The answers were reported as percentages and illustrated in pie charts.

resultsThe response rate was 58% among all centers invited (138/81), 20% among all individual invitations (122/624 answers). Globally, we gathered responses from 23 countries. Most surgeons were older than 34 years, 71% trained in an academic center, and 64% performed less than ten full RARP cases. Transperitoneal is the most common access, and 63% routinely opens the endopelvic fascia. Almost 90% perform the Rocco's stitch, and 94% perform the anastomosis with barbed sutures. Finally, only 31% of surgeons assisted more than 100 cases before moving to the console, and most surgeons (63.9%) performed less than ten full RARP cases during their training.

conclusionBy assessing the robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy training status in 23 countries and 81 centers worldwide, we assessed the trainees' demography, step-by-step surgical technique, training perspectives, and impressions of surgeons who trained in the last five years. This data is crucial for a better understanding the trainee's standpoint, addressing potential deficiencies, and implementing improvements needed in the training process. Our study clearly indicates elements of current training modalities that are prone to major improvement.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansMaleProstateProstatectomyProstate cancerRobotic radical prostatectomyRobotic surgery fellowshipRobotic surgery training

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.