Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T15:18:57.549Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The MAVID heart holder: a demonstration device to anchor cadaver hearts for surgical simulation and practical education*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2015

Constantine Mavroudis ,
Rachid Idriss  and
Kristen E. Klaus
Constantine Mavroudis*
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Children’s Heart Surgery, Florida Hospital for Children, Orlando, Florida, United States of America
Rachid Idriss
Affiliation:
Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
Kristen E. Klaus
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Children’s Heart Surgery, Florida Hospital for Children, Orlando, Florida, United States of America
*
Correspondence to: Dr. C. Mavroudis, MD, Johns Hopkins Children’s Heart Surgery, Florida Hospital for Children, 2501 N Orange Ave, Suite 540, Orlando, FL 32804, United States of America. Tel: 407 303 3697; Fax: 407 303 3634; E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Performing open heart surgery involves learning challenging techniques and a need for realistic training models to achieve and maintain a high level of surgical skills. The MAVID heart holder is an organ holder primarily designed to hold the heart in its anatomic position for the purpose of surgical simulation and education, thereby closing the gap between surgical performance in the laboratory and in the operating room. The device is simple to use, can be adjusted to organ size, and has the necessary instrumentation to be used with any solid organ. The MAVID heart holder also provides a platform for presentation and assists in advancing the research sphere. The advantage over other existing models is that the MAVID heart holder uses real tissue and does not distort the organ at the attachment sites. Further, it offers superior stability as well as the ability to manipulate the organ during presentation and dissection. Training with the MAVID heart holder has the potential to shorten training time to acquire surgical skills and proficiency before performing these techniques in the operating room and in so doing enhance patient safety.

Keywords

Surgical trainingsurgical proficiencysolid organ simulation
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 25 , Issue 8: HeartWeek 2015 , December 2015 , pp. 1626 - 1630
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Presented at the Johns Hopkins All Children’s Heart Institute 15th Annual International Symposium on Congenital Heart Disease, Saint Petersburg, Florida, United States of America, Friday 6 February, 2015 to Monday 9 February, 2015.

References

1.Kwolek, CJ, Crawford, RS. Training the next generation of vascular specialists: current status and future perspectives. J Endovasc Ther 2009; 16 (Suppl 1): 142–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Khairy, GA. Surgical residency training program. Are changes needed? Surgery 2009; 30: 698–701.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Reuthebuch, O, Lang, A, Groscurth, P, Lachat, M, Turina, M, Zund, G. Advanced training model for beating heart coronary artery surgery: the Zurich heart-trainer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2002; 22: 244–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Kuhls, DA, Risucci, DA, Bowyer, MW, Luchette, FA. Advanced surgical skills for exposure in trauma: a new surgical skills cadaver course for surgery residents and fellows. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2013; 74: 664–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Aggarwal, R, Cheshire, N, Darzi, A. Endovascular simulation-based training. Surgeon 2008; 6: 196–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Carter, YM, Marshall, MB. Open lobectomy simulator is an effective tool for teaching thoracic surgical skills. Ann Thorac Surg 2009; 87: 1546–1550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Ault, MJ, Rosen, BT, Ault, B. The use of tissue models for vascular access training. Phase 1 of the procedural patient safety initiative. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21: 514–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Sadaba, JR, O’Regan, DJ, Kappetein, AP. Adapt or die. The imperative for a culture of innovation in cardio-thoracic surgical training. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2007; 31: 959–960.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Matsumura, N, Hayashi, N, Hamada, H, Shibata, T, Horie, Y, Endo, S. A newly designed training tool for microvascular anastomosis techniques: microvascular practice card. Surg Neurol 2008; 71: 616–620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Said, SM. My aortic root simulator: if I can build it, you can build it. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2015; 20: 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Liu, H, Yan, J, Zhou, Y, Li, H, Li, C. A novel dynamic cardiac simulator utilizing pneumatic artificial muscle. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013; 2013: 715–718.Google ScholarPubMed
12.De Raet, JM, Arroyo, J, Buchner, S, et alHow to build your own coronary anastomosis simulator from scratch. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2013; 16: 772–776.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Chamberlain, ER. Cardiac surgical trainer and method for making same. US Patent 6,685,481 B2, filed 5 September, 2001; issued 3 February, 2004.Google Scholar
14.LaFrance, H, Stobie, R. Simulated heart and valve root for training and testing. US Patent 20070269784 A1, filed 1 May, 2006; issued 22 November, 2007.Google Scholar
15.Loor, G. Surgical training apparatus. US Patent 20140106328 A1, filed 17 October, 2012; issued 17 April, 2014.Google Scholar
16.Ramphal, PS, Craven, MP, Coore, D. Computer-controlled tissue-based simulator for training in cardiac surgical techniques. US Patent 7798815 B2, filed 3 April, 2002; issued 21 September, 2003.Google Scholar
17.Toly, CC. Human surgical trainer and methods for training. US Patent 6780016 B1, filed 23 October, 2000; issued 24 August, 2004.Google Scholar
18.Kutschka, I. Simulator for simulation of surgical procedures, particularly in cardiac and thoracic surgery. US Patent 20140234821 A1, filed 13 February, 2014; issued 21 August, 2014.Google Scholar
19.Backer, CL, Mavroudis, C. Atrial septal defect, partial anomalous pulmonary venous connection, and scimitar syndrome. In: Mavroudis C, Backer CL (eds). Pediatric Cardiac Surgery, 4th edn. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, UK, 2013: 295–310.Google Scholar
20.Mavroudis, C. Apparatus and method for demonstrating surgical procedures using dead body organs. US Patent 20140087344 A1, filed 13 September, 2013; issued 27 March, 2014.Google Scholar
21.Trehan, K, Kemp, CD, Yang, SC. Simulation in cardiothoracic surgical training: where do we stand? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 147: 18–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Baker, CJ, Sinha, R, Sullivan, ME. Development of a cardiac surgery simulation curriculum: from needs assessment results to practical implementation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 144: 7–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.McGaghie, WC, Issenberg, SB, Cohen, ER, Barsuk, JK, Wayne, DB. Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Acad Med 2011; 86: 706–711.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Ahmed, N, Chung, R. Multiple organ procurement: a tool for teaching operative technique of major vascular control. J Trauma 2008; 65: 1093–1094.Google ScholarPubMed
25.Cates, CU, Gallagher, AG. The future of simulation technologies for complex cardiovascular procedures. Eur Heart J 2012; 33: 2127–2134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Fox, KF. Simulation-based learning in cardiovascular medicine: benefits for the trainee, the trained and the patient. Heart 2012; 98: 527–528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Fann, JI, Feins, RH, Hicks, GL Jr, Nesbitt, JC, Hammon, JW, Crawford, FA Jr. Evaluation of simulation in cardiothoracic surgery: the senior tour perspective. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 143: 264–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed