Shortening surgical training through robotics: randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus robotic surgical learning curves

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery is the standard technique for many operations. Laparoscopic training has a long learning curve. Robotic solutions may shorten the training pathway. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic with robotic training in surgical trainees and medical students. METHODS: Surgical trainees (ST group) were randomized to receive 6 h of robotic or laparoscopic simulation training. They then performed three surgical tasks in cadaveric specimens. Medical students (MS group) had 2 h of robotic or laparoscopic simulation training followed by one surgical task. The Global Rating Scale (GRS) score (maximum 30), number of suture errors, and time to complete each procedure were recorded. RESULTS: The median GRS score for the ST group was better for each procedure after robotic training compared with laparoscopic training (total GRS score: 27·00 (i.q.r. 22·25–28·33) versus 18·00 (16·50–19·04) respectively, P < 0·001; 10 participants in each arm). The ST group made fewer errors in robotic than in laparoscopic tasks, for both continuous (7·00 (4·75–9·63) versus 22·25 (20·75–25·25); P < 0·001) and interrupted (8·25 (6·38–10·13) versus 29·50 (23·75–31·50); P < 0·001) sutures. For the MS group, the robotic group completed 8·67 interrupted sutures with 15·50 errors in 40 min, compared with only 3·50 sutures with 40·00 errors in the laparoscopic group (P < 0·001) (10 participants in each arm). Fatigue and physical comfort levels were better after robotic compared with laparoscopic operating for both groups (P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: The acquisition of surgical skills in surgical trainees and the surgically naive takes less time with a robotic compared with a laparoscopic platform.