Skip to main content
Log in

The avian model: a novel and cost-effective animal tissue model for training in neonatal laparoscopic surgery

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Pediatric Endoscopic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To design and validate a new and cost-effective animal tissue model for training neonatal minimal access surgery (MAS) skills.

Methods

A prospective observational study was performed during two Minimally Access Surgery Skill Labs in June 2018 and April 2019. Selected laparoscopic exercises were performed on fresh chicken cadavers using 3 mm MAS instruments (adhesiolysis, cholecystectomy and intestinal anastomosis). Data for validation were collected with a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire based on the Michigan Standard Simulation Experience Scale (MiSSES) and analysis was performed.

Results

Twenty-seven course participants were recruited (18 females: 9 males). Eighteen delegates (67%) had experience < 50 MAS cases, 6 delegates (22%) 50–100 cases and 3 delegates (11%) > 100 cases. The mean perceived degree of realism was 3.85 ± 0.99, and for abdominal cavity 4.00 ± 1.25, port placement 3.52 ± 1.40, pneumoperitoneum creation 3.59 ± 1.39, camera manipulation 4.07 ± 1.09, instrument manipulation 4.44 ± 1.13, tissue dissection 4.11 ± 0.99 and intracorporal suturing and knot tying 4.22 ± 1.37. The perceived degree of improvement of understanding MAS basics was 4.65 ± 0.55, knowledge 4.15 ± 1.11, confidence and ability 4.15 ± 1.11. The overall satisfaction with the avian model was 4.64 ± 0.56.

Conclusion

The novel avian tissue model for neonatal MAS training could be validated with success. Validation assessment demonstrates that this model is very realistic and effective, making it possible to gain laparoscopic skills especially with intracorporeal suturing and knot tying in a small space. The avian model is a proven and cost-efficient simulator for neonatal MAS training and expands the spectrum of already established simulation models for pediatric surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lacher M, Kuebler JF, Dingemann J, Ure BM (2014) Minimal invasive surgery in the newborn: current status and evidence. Semin Pediatr Surg 23:249–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Porter DJ, Ross G, Yung D, Payne C, Tang B (2018) Design and validation of a novel and cost-effective animal tissue model for training laparoscopic adhesiolysis and mesh repair of an incisional hernia. World J Surg Surg Res 1:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  3. Reznick RK, MacRae H (2006) Teaching surgical skills-changes in the wind. N Engl J Med 355:2664–2669

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Esposito C, Escolino M, Draghici I et al (2016) Training models in pediatric minimally invasive surgery: rabbit model versus porcine model: a comparative study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 26:79–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Badash I, Burtt K, Solorzano CA et al (2016) Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques. Ann Transl Med. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.12.24

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Seagull FJ, Rooney DM (2014) Filling a void: developing a standard subjective assessment tool for surgical simulation through focused review of current practices. Surgery 156:718–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gause CD, Grace H, Ben S et al (2016) Advances in pediatric surgical education: a critical appraisal of two consecutive minimally invasive pediatric surgery training courses. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:663–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nair D, Wells JM, Cook N et al (2019) Critical design and validation considerations for the development of neonatal minimally invasive surgery simulators. J Pediatr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.05.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Azzie G, Gerstle JT, Nasr A et al (2011) Development and validation of a pediatric laparoscopic surgery simulator. J Pediatr Surg 46:897–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. de Montbrun SL, MacRae H (2012) Simulation in surgical education. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 25:156–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER et al (2010) A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ 44:50–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schwab B, Hungness E, Barsness KA et al (2017) The role of simulation in surgical education. J of Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 27:450–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ganpule A, Chhabra JS, Desai M (2015) Chicken and porcine models for training in laparoscopy and robotics. Curr Opin Urol 25:158–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Li MM, George J (2017) A systematic review of low-cost laparoscopic simulators. Surg Endosc 31:38–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nagendran M, Gurusamy KS, Aggarwal R, Loizidou M, Davidson BR (2013) Virtual reality training for surgical trainees in laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006575.pub3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nagendran M, Toon CD, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS (2014) Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with no prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gurusamy KS, Nagendran M, Toon CD, Davidson BR (2014) Laparoscopic surgical box model training for surgical trainees with limited prior laparoscopic experience. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858CD010478.pub2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Zimmerman H, Latifi R, Dehdashti B et al (2011) Intensive laparoscopic training course for surgical residents: program description, initial results and requirements. Surg Endosc 25:3636–3641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. La Torre M, Caruso C (2013) The animal model in advanced laparoscopy resident training. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 23:271–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Van Bruwaena S, Schijven MP, Napolitano D, De Win G, Miserez M (2015) Porcine cadaver organ or virtual reality simulation training for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized-controller trial. J Surg Educ 72:483–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ramachandran A, Kurien A, Patil P et al (2008) A novel training model for laparoscopic pyeloplasty using chicken crop. J Endourol 22:725–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Laguna MP, Arce-Alcazar A, Mochtar CA et al (2006) Construct validity of the chicken model in the simulation of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy suture. J Endourol 20:69–73

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh AG, Jai SJ, Ganpule AP, Vijayakumar M, Sabnis RB, Desai MR (2018) Face, content, and construct validity of a novel chicken model for laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation. Indian J Urol 34:189–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McGougall EM (2007) Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol 21:244–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Van Nortwick SS, Lendvay T, Jensen A, Wright AS, Horvath KD, Kim S (2010) Methodologies for establishing validity in surgical simulation studies. Surgery 147:622–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Schout BM, Hendrikx A, Scheele F et al (2010) Validation and implementation of surgical simulators: a critical review of present, past, and future. Surg Endosc 24:536–546

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Salkini MW, Doarn CR, Kiehl N et al (2010) The role of haptic feedback in laparoscopic training using the LapMentor II. J Endourol 24:99–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Retrosi G, Cundy T, Haddad M et al (2015) Motion analysis-based skills training and assessment in pediatric laparoscopy: construct, concurrent, and content validity for the eoSim simulator. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25:944–950

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Zimmermann.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or living animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zimmermann, P., Wiseman, A.X., Sanchez, O. et al. The avian model: a novel and cost-effective animal tissue model for training in neonatal laparoscopic surgery. J Ped Endosc Surg 1, 99–105 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42804-019-00027-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42804-019-00027-8

Keywords

Navigation