As training in microvascular surgery often involves the use of live animals, it is important that such a practice is regularly revisited and justified, particularly in the context of emerging training strategies such as virtual simulation. This systematic review was therefore designed to assess the ongoing need for their use over other methods. A search of PubMed and MEDLINE using the major MeSH terms: anastomosis, surgical vascular procedures, microsurgery, and training, yielded 1386 titles from which 153 abstracts were read, 70 papers analysed, and 17 included. Nine of these papers were randomised studies that compared different methods of training. Other publications were included if the use of live animals was assessed or commented upon, or both (8 publications). Only one study randomised trainees to a non-living animal model or a living model, with detailed assessment that included clinical transfer to live surgery. It showed no significant difference in the quality of training, and excellent techniques of assessment. There was much discussion on the advantage of regular training and opportunities to practise without tuition, but there was no clear advantage for the use of live animals. Our review emphasises the lack of evidence regarding the need for live animals in the training of microsurgical or microvascular skills. Although the assumption remains that the use of live rats is essential, there is a clear need for a high-quality, comparative study to justify the continued use of such models given the quality of the alternatives now available.
Keywords: anastomosis; microsurgery; training; vascular surgical procedures.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.