4.6 Review

Procedural virtual reality simulation in minimally invasive surgery

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2503-1

Keywords

Virtual reality; Procedural simulation; Training; Laparoscopy; Endoscopy; Endovascular

Categories

Funding

  1. Centre for ultrasound- and image-guided therapy (Trondheim, Norway)
  2. National Centre for Advanced Laparoscopic Surgery (Trondheim, Norway)
  3. SINTEF (Trondheim, Norway)
  4. Executive Board of Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Simulation of procedural tasks has the potential to bridge the gap between basic skills training outside the operating room (OR) and performance of complex surgical tasks in the OR. This paper provides an overview of procedural virtual reality (VR) simulation currently available on the market and presented in scientific literature for laparoscopy (LS), flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy (FGE), and endovascular surgery (EVS). An online survey was sent to companies and research groups selling or developing procedural VR simulators, and a systematic search was done for scientific publications presenting or applying VR simulators to train or assess procedural skills in the PUBMED and SCOPUS databases. The results of five simulator companies were included in the survey. In the literature review, 116 articles were analyzed (45 on LS, 43 on FGE, 28 on EVS), presenting a total of 23 simulator systems. The companies stated to altogether offer 78 procedural tasks (33 for LS, 12 for FGE, 33 for EVS), of which 17 also were found in the literature review. Although study type and used outcomes vary between the three different fields, approximately 90 % of the studies presented in the retrieved publications for LS found convincing evidence to confirm the validity or added value of procedural VR simulation. This was the case in approximately 75 % for FGE and EVS. Procedural training using VR simulators has been found to improve clinical performance. There is nevertheless a large amount of simulated procedural tasks that have not been validated. Future research should focus on the optimal use of procedural simulators in the most effective training setups and further investigate the benefits of procedural VR simulation to improve clinical outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available