Laparoscopic Major Vascular Injury Simulation Using a Synthetic Compared with Porcine Model

Magdy P. Milad, Farah A. Alvi*, Michael T. Breen, Cynthia Brincat, Peter J. Frederick, Christina Lewicky-Gaupp, Mark Lewis, Bryan Rone, Kimberly Swan, Karin Wollschlaeger

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


BACKGROUND: Major vascular injury training may improve clinical skills and reduce patient morbidity during gynecologic laparoscopy; thus, reliable models for simulation should be identified. METHOD: Two laparoscopic major vascular injury simulations using synthetic or live porcine models were constructed. The primary surgeon was given the opportunity to complete both simulations. After obtaining peritoneal access, the surgeon quickly encountered a major vascular injury. Degrading vital signs and estimated blood loss coupled with the replay of a human heartbeat that increased in volume and intensity were provided to heighten tension during the synthetic simulation. EXPERIENCE: Twenty-two gynecologic surgery educators evaluated the simulations. Educators considered the porcine model superior to the synthetic model with regard to tissue handling. The synthetic model simulation was found to be equivalent to the porcine model on how likely the simulation would be able to improve performance in a clinical setting. Educators were more likely to implement the synthetic simulation over the porcine simulation. CONCLUSION: The synthetic model was found to be more feasible and as effective as the porcine model to simulate and teach the initial management steps of major vascular injury at laparoscopy by gynecologic educators.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)24S-28S
JournalObstetrics and gynecology
StatePublished - Oct 1 2017

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic Major Vascular Injury Simulation Using a Synthetic Compared with Porcine Model'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this