Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Raffy L Karamanoukian.
In this pilot trial in piglets, the authors demonstrated the feasibility of applying robot technology to vascular microsurgery. This preliminary work suggests certain advantages of the robot, which should encourage more rigorous study for its full exploitation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Transfer of training refers to the ability to transfer acquired skills from one discipline to another. This study aims to determine whether experience in traditional freehand microsurgery facilitates mastery of robotic microsurgery. METHODS: Microsurgical anastomoses of coronary arteries harvested from explanted pig models were used to demonstrate whether prior experience with microsurgery is required in learning robot-assisted microsuturing. Eighty microsurgical anastomoses were performed. Three fully trained vascular surgeons (n = 3) (Group A) and 5 midlevel surgical residents (n = 5) (Group B) performed the anastomoses. Each subject performed 5 freehand and 5 robotic-assisted (Zeus robotic system) anastomoses. Anastomosis time and integrity of anastomoses were recorded, including errors of management (EOM) (breaking suture, breaking knots, breaking or damaging needles). RESULTS: For fully trained surgeons, all anastomoses in the robotic-assisted group were mechanically intact. There was significantly increased anastomosis time with the robot (Robot: 14 minutes, versus freehand: 7.2 minutes, P < 0.01). The robotic-assisted anastomoses were associated with a higher EOM (Robot: 1.2, versus freehand: 0.3, P < 0.01). Surgical trainees had longer anastomosis times with robotic assistance (Robot: 14.8 minutes, versus freehand, 12.7 minutes; P < 0.01) and increased EOM (Robot: 1.6, versus freehand: 1.0; P < 0.05).Overall, surgical trainees and fully trained vascular surgeons had longer anastomotic times with robotic assistance [Robot: 14.0 versus 14.8 minutes; P = not significant (NS)], and EOM (Robot: 1.6, versus freehand: 1.2; P = NS) were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The technical feasibility of performing a safe and efficient robotic-assisted microsurgical anastomosis in explanted vessels was repeatedly tested and demonstrated in this study within reasonable time required for the anastomosis. Compared with conventional microanastomosis, both fully trained surgeons and residents demonstrated an ability to master the robotically assisted procedure with similarly longer anastomosis times and EOM. This study indicates that robotically assisted microanastomosis can be mastered equally well by surgical trainees and fully trained vascular surgeons.
Resident education has changed dramatically over the past 10 years. With the implementation of restricted work hours on clinical training, questions have arisen whether these restricted hours will affect clinical competency. This manuscript attempts to answer this question through a survey performed to assess the perception of residents about duty-hour restrictions and the potential effect on residents' clinical exposure. In this study, a majority of the respondents did believe that work-week restrictions significantly affected patient care and clinical exposure. However, few respondents were willing to accept an additional year of training to compensate for the loss of this clinical exposure. Regardless, work-hour restrictions are here to stay and will probably be further limited in the future. Training programs will have to adjust to provide the necessary clinical exposure while complying with these new ACGME guidelines.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Robotic and minimally invasive surgery represents the future of modern surgical care. However, its role during the training of surgical residents has yet to be investigated. A previous study conducted by our group surveyed program directors at accredited general surgery training programs in the United States to determine the prevalence and application of robotics in their residency programs. This current study is a follow-up survey sent to residents across the United States to see whether they were being adequately trained and exposed to robotic surgery during their training. A survey was sent to 1800 general surgery residents, and their responses were tabulated and analyzed. Twenty-three per cent of the 1800 residents responded to our survey. An overwhelming 57 per cent of the responders indicated a high interest in robotic surgery. However, 80 per cent of the responders indicated not having a robotic training program. Robotic surgery has led to many promising advancements within the surgical subspecialties. With this emerging technology comes the need for a greater emphasis on the training of surgeons in robotics during their residency.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Robotics has been recognized as a major driving force in the advancement of minimally invasive surgery. However, the extent to which General Surgery residents are being trained to use robotic technology has never been assessed. A survey was sent to program directors of accredited General Surgery training programs to determine the prevalence and application of robotics in surgical training programs. Responses were tabulated and analyzed. Thirty-three per cent indicated interest in minimally invasive surgery. Twelve per cent of responders have used robotics in their practice, and 65 per cent felt robotics will play an important role in the future of General Surgery. Currently residents from 14 per cent of the responding training programs have exposure to robotic technology, and residents from an additional 4 per cent of these programs have limited didactic exposure. Program directors from 23 per cent of responding programs identified plans to incorporate robotics into their program. Robotics have been shown to make standard endoscopic surgical procedures more efficient and cost-effective as well as allowing a variety of procedures that were only possible with conventional methods to be completed with minimally invasive techniques. This new technology promises to be a large part of the future of surgery and as such deserves more attention in the training of General Surgery residents.
Snap-caps are marketed as a relatively safe pyrotechnic (explosive) device for children 8 years and older. Individually, the snap-caps pose very little threat because the amount of explosive compounds contained in each is limited to 1 mg. However, the accidental explosion of numerous snap-caps may cause significant burns. This study highlights a series of pediatric patients who presented with severe second- and third-degree burns as a result of accidental explosion of snap-caps. Seven patients with snap-caps-related injuries were treated at the University of California, San Diego Regional Burn Center from January 1996 to April 1999. Study foci included 1) mode and extent of injury, 2) management, 3) associated morbidity, and 4) functional outcome. Six patients (84%) required hospital admission. Four patients (57%) underwent split-thickness skin grafting to repair mean TBSA burns of 4.1% (range, 2-8%). Three patients (43%) received aggressive management of burns with topical medications and dressing changes. The nature and extent of snap-cap injuries support the contention that snap-caps have the potential to harm children to whom they are marketed.