ArticleBMC surgery2025
Printed simulation models versus organ models in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass training: a prospective validation study of efficacy, learning curve, and cost-effectiveness.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is a complex bariatric surgical procedure that demands advanced technical skills. However, traditional training models (virtual simulators, cadavers, and porcine organs) are Limited by issues concerning realism, cost, and accessibility. Although 3D-printed models offer promising potential solutions, their application in LRYGB training remains underexplored.
methods3D-printed silicone models of stomach and small intestine were fabricated using patient-derived anatomical data. The physical properties of these models (tensile strength, conductivity, and rheology) were compared with those of human and porcine tissues. Face and content validity , as well as technical realism, were evaluated through expert questionnaires. Construct validity was assessed using the Modified Bariatric Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (MBOSATS). Trainees participated in repeated simulation sessions to evaluate their learning curves.
resultsThe silicone models demonstrated tensile strengths comparable to those of human tissues. Additionally, they exhibited superior aesthetics compared to porcine models (P < 0.05). Experts highly rated the face and content validity of the models, with median scores ranging from 4 to 5 out of 5. MBOSATS scores effectively differentiated between expertise levels (experts: 188.2 ± 1.48 vs. Intermediates: 145.10 ± 11.45 vs. residents: 64.1 ± 4.19, P < 0.001). In terms of training effectiveness, trainees achieved proficiency after 4-5 sessions, and post-training performance of residents on porcine models matched that of intermediates (P > 0.05). The models cost $2,000, significantly less than cadaver or animal alternatives.
conclusionsThe 3D-printed silicone models exhibit realistic mechanical properties, process high validity, and have proven effective in expediting skill acquisition during LRYGB training. They serve as a cost-effective and ethical alternative to traditional training tools, offering particular advantages in resource-constrained settings.
trial registrationThis study was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) under registration number ChiCTR2300078726 on 15 December 2023. The trial protocol was approved prior to the enrollment of the first participant, ensuring adherence to ethical standards and transparency in reporting health care intervention outcomes.
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.