The Learning Curve in Urogynecology and Functional Urology: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Introduction and HypothesisWhen adopting new methods, surgeons may experience a period of complexity and longer operation times because of their inexperience. This period is known as the "learning curve." This study was aimed at systematically reviewing the current literature on functional urology learning curves.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases from inception to July 2023 with no language restrictions. All original studies on urogynecological and functional urological procedures, including cross-sectional, cohort, and clinical trials, were eligible for inclusion. Relevant data were extracted, and methodological quality was appraised using standardized Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. To quantitatively investigate learning curves, a mixed-effects generalized linear regression analysis was conducted on studies employing cumulative summation methods.ResultsFrom the 7,104 records, 68 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were observational and the most common outcome measures were surgical duration, blood loss, and hospital stay. The learning curves varied by procedure type-for incontinence surgeries, 15-80 cases were required; for pelvic organ prolapse surgeries, 18-47 cases; for laparoscopic procedures, 10-105 cases; and for robotic procedures, 5-84 cases. The analysis showed that the number of cases required to surpass the learning curve decreased over time, likely reflecting technological advancements and increased surgical experience.ConclusionThe learning curve for surgical procedures varies significantly. It varies between 5 cases for robotic supratrigonal cystectomy to 75 cases for robot-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy or robotic sacrocolpopexy surgery in 84 cases. These variable learning curves highlight the need for structured training programs and ongoing assessment.