medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Urología

Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Urología
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2010, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Urol 2010; 70 (1)

Urological laparoscopic surgery training model

Ramos-Salgado F, Quintero-Becerra J, Hernández-Toriz N
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 31-35
PDF size: 311.28 Kb.


Key words:

laparoscopic urology, mechanical simulators, minimally invasive surgery.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To present an inanimate training model for laparoscopic surgery.
Materials and methods: A mechanical inanimate simulator was developed that includes a white light illumination system, excellent quality camera image, a sound system of two integrated speakers for creating a pleasing atmosphere during training, a 10 cm gauged rod and a chronometer for counting the time required for performing the exercises and for registering advances in skill development.
The simulator is designed so that the skills described in the McGill Inanimate System for Training and Evaluation of Laparoscopic Skills (MISTELS) manual can be carried out. MISTELS is a valid program that is used worldwide.
Conclusions: Laparoscopic training has become an important subject not only for learning but also for maintaining skills and resolving complications. The inanimate mechanical simulator described here has a life-size anatomical design and is an excellent option for practicing laparoscopic technique and acquiring necessary skills.


REFERENCES

  1. Laguna MP, de Reijke TM, de la Rosette JJ. How far will simulators be involved into training? Curr Urol Rep 2009;10(2):97-105.

  2. Rassweiler J, Klein J, Teber D, Schulze M, Frede T. Mechanical simulators for training for laparoscopic surgery in urology. J Endourol 2007;21(3):252-63.

  3. Dayan AB, Ziv A, Berkenstadt H, Munz Y. A simple, low-cost platform for basic laparoscopic skills training. Surg Innov 2008;15(2);136-42.

  4. Ramirez-Backhaus M, Hellawell G, Melo M. Teaching laparoscopy to residents: how can we select good candidates?. Curr Urol Rep 2009;10(2):106–11.

  5. Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC. Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 2004;240(3):518–25.

  6. Dauster B, Steinberg AP, Vassiliou MC. Validity of the MISTELS simulator for laparoscopy training in urology. J Endourol 2005;19(5):541-5.

  7. McDougall EM. Validation of surgical simulators. J Endourol 2007;21(3):244-7.

  8. Dankelman J. Surgical simulator design and development. World J Surg 2008;32(2):149–55.

  9. Tarco DR, Alva PA, Pazos FA. Entrenamiento laparoscópico en un modelo para prácticas domiciliarias. Rev Per Urol 2007;XVI Enero-Julio.

  10. Lehmann KS, Ritz JP, Maass H. A prospective randomized study to test the transfer of basic psychomotor skills from virtual reality to physical reality in a comparable training setting. Ann Surg 2005;241(3):442–9.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Urol. 2010;70