Sebastian Senger, Magomed Lepshokov, Thomas Tschernig, Guiseppe Cinalli, Joachim Oertel
{"title":"评估脑室内神经内窥镜检查的训练模型。","authors":"Sebastian Senger, Magomed Lepshokov, Thomas Tschernig, Guiseppe Cinalli, Joachim Oertel","doi":"10.1007/s10143-024-03082-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Structured surgical education has become increasingly important in recent years. Intraventricular neuroendoscopic procedures have been widely established. However, training surgical skills with these techniques is crucial for young residents due to the potential harm to adjacent tissue. Therefore, we evaluated two different training models. Participants in two different international workshops were trained on a prefixed cadaver model and on a living murine intraabdominal model. Crucial neuroendoscopic techniques such as membrane perforation and tissue biopsy were performed. A blinded questionnaire evaluated both models. Sixty-three participants were trained on the animal model. Forty of these were trained on the cadaver model. The training effect was evaluated almost equally, with 8.5/10 for the animal model and 8.9/10 for the cadaver model. The tissue properties were rated higher regarding realism in the animal model, whereas the anatomic realism was rated higher in the cadaver model. The animal model is a valid alternative to cadaver models for teaching endoscopic neurosurgical skills. This model benefits from the simulation of real surgical tissue properties, including bleeding. The low costs and availability of this technique make it more ubiquitous and can help train further generations of neurosurgeons.</p>","PeriodicalId":19184,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of training models for intraventricular neuroendoscopy.\",\"authors\":\"Sebastian Senger, Magomed Lepshokov, Thomas Tschernig, Guiseppe Cinalli, Joachim Oertel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10143-024-03082-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Structured surgical education has become increasingly important in recent years. Intraventricular neuroendoscopic procedures have been widely established. However, training surgical skills with these techniques is crucial for young residents due to the potential harm to adjacent tissue. Therefore, we evaluated two different training models. Participants in two different international workshops were trained on a prefixed cadaver model and on a living murine intraabdominal model. Crucial neuroendoscopic techniques such as membrane perforation and tissue biopsy were performed. A blinded questionnaire evaluated both models. Sixty-three participants were trained on the animal model. Forty of these were trained on the cadaver model. The training effect was evaluated almost equally, with 8.5/10 for the animal model and 8.9/10 for the cadaver model. The tissue properties were rated higher regarding realism in the animal model, whereas the anatomic realism was rated higher in the cadaver model. The animal model is a valid alternative to cadaver models for teaching endoscopic neurosurgical skills. This model benefits from the simulation of real surgical tissue properties, including bleeding. The low costs and availability of this technique make it more ubiquitous and can help train further generations of neurosurgeons.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgical Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554941/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-03082-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-03082-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of training models for intraventricular neuroendoscopy.
Structured surgical education has become increasingly important in recent years. Intraventricular neuroendoscopic procedures have been widely established. However, training surgical skills with these techniques is crucial for young residents due to the potential harm to adjacent tissue. Therefore, we evaluated two different training models. Participants in two different international workshops were trained on a prefixed cadaver model and on a living murine intraabdominal model. Crucial neuroendoscopic techniques such as membrane perforation and tissue biopsy were performed. A blinded questionnaire evaluated both models. Sixty-three participants were trained on the animal model. Forty of these were trained on the cadaver model. The training effect was evaluated almost equally, with 8.5/10 for the animal model and 8.9/10 for the cadaver model. The tissue properties were rated higher regarding realism in the animal model, whereas the anatomic realism was rated higher in the cadaver model. The animal model is a valid alternative to cadaver models for teaching endoscopic neurosurgical skills. This model benefits from the simulation of real surgical tissue properties, including bleeding. The low costs and availability of this technique make it more ubiquitous and can help train further generations of neurosurgeons.
期刊介绍:
The goal of Neurosurgical Review is to provide a forum for comprehensive reviews on current issues in neurosurgery. Each issue contains up to three reviews, reflecting all important aspects of one topic (a disease or a surgical approach). Comments by a panel of experts within the same issue complete the topic. By providing comprehensive coverage of one topic per issue, Neurosurgical Review combines the topicality of professional journals with the indepth treatment of a monograph. Original papers of high quality are also welcome.