Comparing outcomes of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy by specialists and trainees using a modular training approach

Abstract

dual console, where supervisors can assume control of the robot from a secondary console if required. Here we evaluate the safety of robotic training by comparing pathological and peri-operative outcomes of RALPs performed predominantly by urology trainees supported by a modular training approach and dual console supervision with RALPs performed predominantly by specialist robotic surgeons. This prospective cohort study examines RALPs performed at a tertiary robotic training centre in Australia between February 2017 and August 2018. Each case was divided into 13 steps from port placement to specimen retrieval. A case was considered a 'trainee-lead case' if the trainee completed more than 75% of the operative steps. We compared patient demographics, operative parameters, peri-operative outcomes, and pathological outcomes between groups. Differences between groups were measured using Fisher's exact test for categorical data and the unpaired Student's t-test for continuous data. Of 126 cases in this study, 39 (31%) were trainee-led cases and 87 (69%) were specialist lead cases. There was no significant difference in operative or pathological outcomes between trainee-lead cases and specialist-lead cases. Our results compared favourably with local and international benchmarks. RALP performed by trainees using a modular training approach and supported by the dual console can have equivalent peri-operative and pathological outcomes to specialist-led cases. This is achieved by graded progression and dual console supervision.