Learning curve and influencing factors of performing microsurgical anastomosis: a laboratory prospective study.

Fiche publication

Date publication

octobre 2022

Journal

Neurosurgical review

Auteurs

Membres identifiés du Cancéropôle Est :
Dr CEBULA Hélène , Pr PROUST François

Tous les auteurs :
Lefevre E, Ganau M, Zaed I, de Macedo Machado-Filho G, Scibilia A, Mallereau CH, Bresson D, Todeschi J, Cebula H, Proust F, Vignes JL, Masquelet AC, Facca S, Livernaux P, Alfieri A, Ramos TCM, Magaldi M, Bruno C, Chibbaro S

Lien Pubmed

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36066661

Résumé

Despite being a critical component of any cerebrovascular procedure, acquiring skills in microsurgical anastomosis is challenging for trainees. In this context, simulation models, especially laboratory training, enable trainees to master microsurgical techniques before performing real surgeries. The objective of this study was to identify the factors influencing the learning curve of microsurgical training. A prospective observational study was conducted during a 7-month diploma in microsurgical techniques carried out in the anatomy laboratory of the school of surgery. Training focused on end-to-end (ETE) and end-to-side (ETS) anastomoses performed on the abdominal aorta, vena cava, internal carotid and jugular vein, femoral artery and vein, caudal artery, etc. of Wistar strain rats under supervision of 2 expert anatomical trainers. Objective and subjective data were collected after each training session. The 44 microsurgical trainees enrolled in the course performed 1792 anastomoses (1577 ETE, 88%, vs. 215 ETS, 12%). The patency rate of 41% was independent from the trainees' surgical background and previous experience. The dissection and the temporary clamping time both significantly decreased over the months (p < 0.001). Technical mistakes were independently associated with thrombosis of the anastomoses, as assessed by the technical mistakes score (p < 0.01). The training duration (in weeks) at time of each anastomosis was the only significant predictor of permeability (p < 0.001). Training duration and technical mistakes constituted the two major factors driving the learning curve. Future studies should try and investigate other factors (such as access to wet laboratory, dedicated fellowships, mentoring during early years as junior consultant/attending) influencing the retention of surgical skills for our difficult and challenging discipline.