MP73-05 A HYDROGEL TRANSPERINEAL BENCHTOP PROSTATE BIOPSY SIMULATOR WITH A BUILT-IN REAL-TIME QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF BIOPSY ACCURACY

You have accessJournal of UrologySurgical Technology & Simulation: Training & Skills Assessment (MP73)1 May 2024MP73-05 A HYDROGEL TRANSPERINEAL BENCHTOP PROSTATE BIOPSY SIMULATOR WITH A BUILT-IN REAL-TIME QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF BIOPSY ACCURACY Lauren Shepard, Jiawei Liu, Lydia Al-Zogbi, Gloria Kalnitskaya, Avinash Dhimal, Junichi Tokuda, Axel Krieger, Arvin George, and Ahmed Ghazi Lauren ShepardLauren Shepard , Jiawei LiuJiawei Liu , Lydia Al-ZogbiLydia Al-Zogbi , Gloria KalnitskayaGloria Kalnitskaya , Avinash DhimalAvinash Dhimal , Junichi TokudaJunichi Tokuda , Axel KriegerAxel Krieger , Arvin GeorgeArvin George , and Ahmed GhaziAhmed Ghazi View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009564.26544.1c.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The transrectal approach remains the most common method of prostate biopsy, despite the virtual elimination of infection and sepsis without the need of antibiotic prophylaxis via transperineal biopsy (TPBx); therefore, there is a call to transition. Due to the lack of training platforms, we present a non-biohazardous simulator with built-in metrics for TPBx training and evaluation. METHODS: An ideal patient's 3T MRI Images was selected from a prospective database of MRI scans and segmented to incorporate essential anatomy: perineum, prostate, seminal vesicles, vas deferens, bladder, urethra, rectum, pubic bone, pelvic diaphragm and ischiocavernosus muscles. A TPBx model was fabricated using our published approach of 3D printing and hydrogel molding. Tissue tensile strength was modeled after a series of cadaver mechanical testing (Instron Universal Testing System). For evaluation of biopsy accuracy, the transition, central, peripheral, and anterior zones (TZ, CZ, PZ, AZ) were colored differently (Figure 1A), thus yielding immediate feedback on successful biopsy. Six experts and four novices completed TPBx on the model targeting a 12-core template (Figure 1B-C). Cores were measured for accuracy, core length, and number of attempts (Figure 1D). A survey also assessed adequacy of the model. RESULTS: 82%, 71%, and 86% agreed the simulated tissue resembles the appearance under ultrasound, mimics key portions of the procedure, and is useful as a training tool. Experts successfully biopsied the cores at a higher accuracy than novices (p<0.001) and superior length (p<0.001), but with no difference in number of attempts (p=0.14). Base posterior, lateral, and anterior cores demonstrated the greatest difference in core length among experts and novices (p<0.05, 0.01, 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study using our non-biohazardous benchtop simulator for TPBx demonstrated the ability to distinguish between experts and novices using a quantitative assessment. Our next step includes a multicenter validation study. Download PPTDownload PPT Source of Funding: N/A © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e1183 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Lauren Shepard More articles by this author Jiawei Liu More articles by this author Lydia Al-Zogbi More articles by this author Gloria Kalnitskaya More articles by this author Avinash Dhimal More articles by this author Junichi Tokuda More articles by this author Axel Krieger More articles by this author Arvin George More articles by this author Ahmed Ghazi More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...