Development and validation of surgical training tool: cystectomy assessment and surgical evaluation (CASE) for robot-assisted radical cystectomy for men.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to develop a structured scoring tool: cystectomy assessment and surgical evaluation (CASE) that objectively measures and quantifies performance during robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for men. METHODS: A multinational 10-surgeon expert panel collaborated towards development and validation of CASE. The critical steps of RARC in men were deconstructed into nine key domains, each assessed by five anchors. Content validation was done utilizing the Delphi methodology. Each anchor was assessed in terms of context, score concordance, and clarity. The content validity index (CVI) was calculated for each aspect. A CVI ≥ 0.75 represented consensus, and this statement was removed from the next round. This process was repeated until consensus was achieved for all statements. CASE was used to assess de-identified videos of RARC to determine reliability and construct validity. Linearly weighted percent agreement was used to assess inter-rater reliability (IRR). A logit model for odds ratio (OR) was used to assess construct validation. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus on CASE after four rounds. The final eight domains of the CASE included: pelvic lymph node dissection, development of the peri-ureteral space, lateral pelvic space, anterior rectal space, control of the vascular pedicle, anterior vesical space, control of the dorsal venous complex, and apical dissection. IRR > 0.6 was achieved for all eight domains. Experts outperformed trainees across all domains. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated a reliable structured, procedure-specific tool for objective evaluation of surgical performance during RARC. CASE may help differentiate novice from expert performances.

Development and Validation of an Objective Scoring Tool for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Prostatectomy Assessment and Competency Evaluation.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive training and skill acquisition by urological surgeons are vital to optimize surgical outcomes and patient safety. We sought to develop and validate PACE (Prostatectomy Assessment and Competence Evaluation), an objective and procedure specific tool to assess the quality of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Development and content validation of PACE was performed by deconstructing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy into 7 key domains utilizing the Delphi methodology. Reliability and construct validation were then assessed using de-identified videos performed by practicing surgeons and fellows. Consensus for each domain was defined as achieving a content validity index of 0.75 or greater. Reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation and construct validation using a mixed linear model accounting for multiple ratings on the same video. RESULTS: After 3 rounds consensus was reached on wording, relevance of the skills assessed and concordance between the score assigned and the skill assessed. An intraclass correlation of 0.4 or greater was achieved for all domains. The expert group outperformed trainees in all domains but reached statistical significance in bladder drop (4.5 vs 3.4, p = 0.002), preparation of the prostate (4.4 vs 3.2, p <0.0001), seminal vesicle and posterior plane dissection (8.3 vs 6.8, p = 0.03), and neurovascular bundle preservation (4.1 vs 2.4, p <0.0001). Limitations included the lack of assessment of other key skills such as communication and decision making. CONCLUSIONS: PACE is a structured, procedure specific and reliable tool that objectively measures surgical performance during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. It can differentiate different levels of expertise and provide structured feedback to customize training and surgical quality improvement.

Development, validation and clinical application of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy Assessment and Completion Evaluation: intraoperative assessment of lymph node dissection after robot-assisted radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a scoring tool, Pelvic Lymphadenectomy Appropriateness and Completion Evaluation (PLACE), to assess the intraoperative completeness and appropriateness of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) following robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). PATIENTS, SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A panel of 11 open and robotic surgeons developed the content and structure of PLACE. The PLND template was divided into three zones. In all, 21 de-identified videos of bilateral robot-assisted PLNDs were assessed by the 11 experts using PLACE to determine inter-rater reliability. Lymph node (LN) clearance was defined as the proportion of cleared LNs from all PLACE zones. We investigated the correlation between LN clearance and LN count. Then, we compared the LN count of 18 prospective PLNDs using PLACE with our retrospective series performed using the extended template (No PLACE). RESULTS: A significant reliability was achieved for all PLACE zones among the 11 raters for the 21 bilateral PLND videos. The median (interquartile range) for LN clearance was 468 (431-545). There was a significant positive correlation between LN clearance and LN count (R2 = 0.70, P < 0.01). The PLACE group yielded similar LN counts when compared to the No PLACE group. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic Lymphadenectomy Appropriateness and Completion Evaluation is a structured intraoperative scoring system that can be used intraoperatively to measure and quantify PLND for quality control and to facilitate training during RARC.

Rectal injury during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: incidence and management.

PURPOSE: Rectal injury during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a rare but significant complication. Since the Clavien grading classification of complications does not include intraoperative injury without further sequelae, rectal injury may be underreported in the literature. We present what is to our knowledge the largest retrospective review to date of rectal injury and subsequent management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the records of 6,650 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at a total of 6 institutions. Patient characteristics, perioperative parameters, pathological findings and rectal injury management were tabulated and analyzed for intraoperative predictors of outcome and subsequent management. RESULTS: A total of 11 rectal injury cases were identified of the 6,650 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies for a combined 0.17% incidence of rectal injury. Of rectal injuries 72.7% were identified intraoperatively and most did well with primary closure. Delayed recognition injury presented as rectourethral fistula without septic complications and required delayed fistula repair after primary diversion. We found no conclusive association of rectal injury with any patient parameter, intraoperative differences, pathological finding or surgeon experience. Posterior prostate plane dissection, including seminal vesicle dissection, is the crucial stage when rectal injury can occur and be identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our review of the records at 6 centers revealed a combined 0.17% incidence of rectal injury. This compares favorably to the incidence in modern open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy series. No preoperative, intraoperative or pathological differences correlated with injury. Cases in which rectal injury was identified intraoperatively required fewer surgical repeat interventions but ultimately each group had acceptable long-term urinary and bowel function results.