Cumulative sum analysis of the learning curve for retrograde intrarenal stone surgery in newbie surgeons.

Ho Young Koo, Jung Wan Yoo, Yeon Joo Kim, Hyun Kyung Jang, Byeong Jo Jeon, Hoon Choi, Jae Hyun Bae, Jae Young Park, Bum Sik Tae
Author Information
  1. Ho Young Koo: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  2. Jung Wan Yoo: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  3. Yeon Joo Kim: Department of Urology, Daegu Fatima Hospital, Daegu, Korea.
  4. Hyun Kyung Jang: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  5. Byeong Jo Jeon: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  6. Hoon Choi: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  7. Jae Hyun Bae: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  8. Jae Young Park: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea.
  9. Bum Sik Tae: Department of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 123 Jeokgeum-Ro, Danwon-Gu, Ansan, 425-707, Korea. blue2you@korea.ac.kr. ORCID

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the learning curve of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in patients with medium-sized stones using cumulative sum analysis (CUSUM) to evaluate the competence and proficiency of three new surgeons during their first RIRS procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 227 patients from 2019 to 2022 at a single institution. The patients were divided into four groups based on the operating surgeon: tutor surgeon (85 patients), newbie surgeon A (21 patients), newbie surgeon B (85 patients), and newbie surgeon C (36 patients). Patients had one or multiple stones with the largest stone diameter fell within the range of 10-30 mm. Fragmentation efficacy was calculated as "removed stone volume (mm3) divided by operative time (minutes)." CUSUM analysis monitored changes in fragmentation efficacy and validated surgical outcomes.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed in the total stone volume, maximum stone size, or total operation time between the three newbie surgeons and the tutor surgeon. The mean fragmentation efficacy value was comparable among the newbie surgeons, but significantly different from that of the tutor surgeon. The minimum acceptable fragmentation efficacy level was set at 25.12 mL/min, based on the tutor's average value. The CUSUM curves for the three surgeons initially remained relatively flat until Cases 12-15, after which they increased and eventually plateaued. Stone-free rates and postoperative complications did not differ significantly among the surgeons.
CONCLUSION: Learning curve analysis for the three newbie surgeons indicated that approximately 12-15 cases were required to reach a plateau.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim JK, Cho YS, Park SY, Joo KJ, Min SK, Lee YG et al (2019) Recent surgical treatments for urinary stone disease in a Korean population: National population-based study. Int J Urol 26(5):558–564 [DOI: 10.1111/iju.13928]
  2. Taguchi K, Cho SY, Ng AC, Usawachintachit M, Tan YK, Deng YL et al (2019) The Urological association of Asia clinical guideline for urinary stone disease. Int J Urol 26(7):688–709 [DOI: 10.1111/iju.13957]
  3. Tae BS, Balpukov U, Cho SY, Jeong CW (2018) Eleven-year Cumulative Incidence and Estimated Lifetime Prevalence of Urolithiasis in Korea: a National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort Based Study. J Korean Med Sci 33(2):e13 [DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e13]
  4. Inoue T, Okada S, Hamamoto S, Fujisawa M (2021) Retrograde intrarenal surgery: Past, present, and future. Investig Clin Urol 62(2):121–135 [DOI: 10.4111/icu.20200526]
  5. Inoue T, Okada S, Hamamoto S, Yoshida T, Matsuda T (2018) Current trends and pitfalls in endoscopic treatment of urolithiasis. Int J Urol 25(2):121–133 [DOI: 10.1111/iju.13491]
  6. Geraghty RM, Davis NF, Tzelves L, Lombardo R, Yuan C, Thomas K et al (2023) Best practice in interventional management of urolithiasis: an update from the European association of urology guidelines panel for urolithiasis 2022. Eur Urol Focus 9(1):199–208 [DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.06.014]
  7. Cho SY, Choo MS, Jung JH, Jeong CW, Oh S, Lee SB et al (2014) Cumulative sum analysis for experiences of a single-session retrograde intrarenal stone surgery and analysis of predictors for stone-free status. PLoS ONE 9(1):e84878 [DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084878]
  8. Chung DY, Kang DH, Cho KS, Jeong WS, Jung HD, Kwon JK et al (2019) Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One 14(2):e0211316 [DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211316]
  9. Akman T, Binbay M, Ozgor F, Ugurlu M, Tekinarslan E, Kezer C et al (2012) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde flexible nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2–4 cm stones: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 109(9):1384–1389 [DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10691.x]
  10. Silva T, Passerotti CC, Pontes Junior J, Maximiano LF, Otoch JP, Cruz J (2022) The learning curve for retrograde intrarenal surgery: A prospective analysis. Rev Col Bras Cir 49:e20223264 [PMID: 35946637]
  11. Quirke K, Aydin A, Brunckhorst O, Bultitude M, Khan MS, Dasgupta P et al (2018) Learning curves in urolithiasis surgery: a systematic review. J Endourol 32(11):1008–1020 [DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0425]
  12. Ulvik Ø, Harneshaug J-R, Gjengstø P (2021) What do we mean by “stone free”, and how accurate are urologists in predicting stone-free status following ureteroscopy? J Endourol 35(7):961–966 [DOI: 10.1089/end.2020.0933]
  13. Maugeri O, Dalmasso E, Peretti D, Venzano F, Chiapello G, Ambruosi C et al (2021) Stone free rate and clinical complications in patients submitted to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS): Our experience in 571 consecutive cases. Arch Ital Urol Androl 93(3):313–317 [DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2021.3.313]
  14. Berardinelli F, Cindolo L, De Francesco P, Proietti S, Hennessey D, Dalpiaz O et al (2017) The surgical experience influences the safety of retrograde intrarenal surgery for kidney stones: a propensity score analysis. Urolithiasis 45(4):387–392 [DOI: 10.1007/s00240-016-0919-0]
  15. Komori M, Izaki H, Daizumoto K, Tsuda M, Kusuhara Y, Mori H et al (2015) Complications of flexible ureteroscopic treatment for renal and ureteral calculi during the learning curve. Urol Int 95(1):26–32 [DOI: 10.1159/000368617]
  16. Netsch C, Knipper AS, Orywal AK, Tiburtius C, Gross AJ (2015) Impact of surgical experience on stone-free rates of ureteroscopy for single urinary calculi of the upper urinary tract: a matched-paired analysis of 600 patients. J Endourol 29(1):78–83 [DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0301]
  17. Johans C, Smelser W, DeRoche C, Campbell J, Cummings J (2018) Assessment of patient and surgical variables including residency training level on adverse events after ureteroscopy for ureteral stones: a multivariate analysis. J Endourol 32(2):144–147 [DOI: 10.1089/end.2017.0757]
  18. Seitz C, Fajkovic H (2014) Training in ureteroscopy for urolithiasis. Arab J Urol 12(1):42–48 [DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2013.08.010]
  19. Cho SY, Lee JY, Shin DG, Seo IY, Yoo S, Park HK (2018) Evaluation of Performance Parameters of the Disposable Flexible Ureterorenoscope (LITHOVUE) in patients with renal stones: a prospective, observational, single-arm, multicenter study. Sci Rep 8(1):9795 [DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-28247-7]
  20. Pallauf M, Sevcenco S, Steiner C, Drerup M, Mitterberger M, Colleselli D et al (2020) LithoVue™ for renal stone therapy - a perfect fit for high volume academic centers; a retrospective evaluation of 108 cases. BMC Urol 20(1):56 [DOI: 10.1186/s12894-020-00624-3]
  21. Proietti S, Somani B, Sofer M, Pietropaolo A, Rosso M, Saitta G et al (2017) The “Body Mass Index” of flexible ureteroscopes. J Endourol 31(10):1090–1095 [DOI: 10.1089/end.2017.0438]
  22. Anan G, Komatsu K, Hatakeyama S, Iwamura H, Kohada Y, Mikami J et al (2020) One-surgeon basketing technique for stone extraction during flexible ureteroscopy for urolithiasis: a comparison between novice and expert surgeons. Int J Urol 27(12):1072–1077 [DOI: 10.1111/iju.14355]

Grants

  1. 2021R1I1A1A01051050/National Research Foundation of Korea

MeSH Term

Humans
Learning Curve
Kidney Calculi
Retrospective Studies
Male
Female
Middle Aged
Clinical Competence
Urologic Surgical Procedures
Adult
Aged

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0patientssurgeonsnewbiesurgeonstonecurveanalysisthreeefficacyCUSUMtutorfragmentationlearningretrogradeintrarenalsurgeryRIRSstonessumdividedbased85volumetimetotalvalueamongsignificantly12-15LearningINTRODUCTION:studyinvestigatedmedium-sizedusingcumulativeevaluatecompetenceproficiencynewfirstproceduresMATERIALSANDMETHODS:conductedretrospectivereview22720192022singleinstitutionfourgroupsoperatingsurgeon:21BC36Patientsonemultiplelargestdiameterfellwithinrange10-30 mmFragmentationcalculated"removedmm3operativeminutes"monitoredchangesvalidatedsurgicaloutcomesRESULTS:statisticallysignificantdifferencesobservedmaximumsizeoperationmeancomparabledifferentminimumacceptablelevelset2512 mL/mintutor'saveragecurvesinitiallyremainedrelativelyflatCasesincreasedeventuallyplateauedStone-freeratespostoperativecomplicationsdifferCONCLUSION:indicatedapproximatelycasesrequiredreachplateauCumulativeFlexibleureteroscopeKidneyMinimallyinvasiveUrolithiasis

Similar Articles

Cited By