Search Submit
Close

Microsurgery Training in Latin America: A Survey of Residents’ Experiences

International Microsurgery Journal. 2022;6(2):1
DOI: 10.24983/scitemed.imj.2022.00166
Article Type: Original Article

Abstract

Objective: Health services in Latin America have witnessed continuous expansion, improving access for patients requiring treatment for trauma and cancer. However, while demand for complex reconstruction is on the rise, the number of trained microsurgeons remains limited. The aim of this study is to investigate current experiences of plastic surgery residents with regard to microsurgery. It also aims to find out ways through which the number of trained microsurgeons in the region can be increased for better medical care.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey was designed to obtain information regarding the exposure and training that plastic surgery residents receive during residency in Latin American countries. We ensured that our procedure followed the data protection rules laid down in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Results: We requested 129 microsurgeons in Latin American countries to respond to our survey questions. A total of 93 survey responses were received, corresponding to a response rate of 72.1%. An analysis of the survey data showed that in terms of hands-on microsurgical training, 79.6% of the respondents had previous experience of being involved in performing a microsurgical procedure. However, 59.1% of the respondents mentioned that this was part of their formal training program. The majority of respondents (74%) reported that they would not be confident in performing a microsurgical procedure unsupervised. About half, or 48.4% of the respondents said that they would consider applying for a microsurgery fellowship. However, only 63.4% reported that they had access to a fellowship program in their home country.
Conclusion: Few resident plastic surgeons in Latin America are able to attain the required level of experience so as to feel comfortable acting as independent microsurgeons. Both time and effort are required to address this problem. A powerful tool to change this situation is to gain access to international microsurgical fellowships. An influx of returning trained microsurgeons can provide two benefits: (a) increasing the caseload in the short run, and (b) improving the training of plastic surgeons for future generations of doctors.

Keywords

  • Learning curve; microsurgery; residency program; residents; training

Introduction

Microsurgery is a powerful tool in the reconstructive field, allowing free transfer of vascularized tissues to restore form and function. Strategies to train the next generation of microsurgeons have been studied in detail in literature [1,2]. However, to become competent, plastic surgery residents require exposure to microsurgical procedures, either simulated or in clinical settings. Microsurgery courses play a major role in the first steps of the learning curve for trainees to acquire skills. These skills can then be applied in the operating room under supervision. Previous studies have shown that the free flap success rate is directly correlated with surgical training and experience [3,4].

Over the last half century, health services in Latin America have sustained continuous expansion, improving access for patients requiring treatment for trauma and cancer. While demand for complex reconstruction is increasing in Latin America, the number of trained microsurgeons remains limited [5]. Despite reports that the area has a sufficient number of certified plastic surgeons, there are not many trained microsurgeons, and microsurgery procedures cannot be performed in all regions. A literature search shows that no previous study has looked into the training opportunities for microsurgery in Latin America. This study analyzes the present status and aims to find strategies to improve microsurgery training in the region.

Methods

A GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) compliant, cross-sectional survey was designed to obtain information regarding the exposure and training that plastic surgery residents experience during residency in Latin American countries. This survey consisted of 15 questions including demographic information (Table 1). Senior residents and plastic surgeons who had completed their training within two years of the survey were approached to participate. The survey was voluntary and anonymous, and was distributed using the online survey platform, Jisc, United Kingdom. The respondents were from five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, and Uruguay. No compensation was offered to participants.

Data was extracted from the platform and collated in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Descriptive and inferential statistics was performed using SPSS software 26.0. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare percentages obtained and results were significant at a P-value less than 0.05.

 

Results

Surveys were distributed to eligible participants in five training centers in Argentina, five centers in Brazil, two in Chile, three in Mexico and two in Uruguay. A total of 93 survey responses were received, corresponding to a response rate of 72.1%. Forty-four percent of the survey responses were answered by residents and 56% by recently graduated plastic surgeons (Table 2). We organized the survey in three major sections: laboratory training, clinic training and post-residency training (Table 1).

 

 

In terms of microsurgical training during residency, 79.6% of the respondents said that they had been involved in performing part of a microsurgical procedure either in a clinical or simulated setting. However, for 59.1% of respondents, this was part of their formal training program. Of all participants, 51.6% had experience in microsurgical training with simulated non-living models and 49.5% with living models. In terms of clinical experience, 46.2% of the respondents had collaborated with a primary surgeon in at least one microsurgical procedure as a trainee. However, only 12.9% of them had performed more than 10 procedures.

From the questionnaires, it was evident that 96.8% of the respondents had observed at least one microsurgery procedure, while 90.3% had assisted in at least one operation. Of the surveyed trainees, 25.8% had scrubbed in more than 20 procedures (Figure 1).

 

Figure 1. The distribution of procedures with eligible participants observing (A), assisting (B), or performing them themselves (C). The results of the questionnaire reveal that 96.8% of the respondents have observed at least one microsurgery procedure. In addition, 90.3% have assisted in at least one microsurgery procedure based on their responses to the questionnaire. Of the surveyed trainees, 25.8% have scrubbed in more than 20 procedures.

 

The majority of respondents (74%) reported that they would not be confident in performing a microsurgical procedure unsupervised. Trainees who had some degree of training were more confident about this technique than the group that did not (P = 0.01).

When asked about the main limitations in microsurgical training, residents responded that there were not enough cases (22%), lack of experienced trainers (19%) and that cases in their unit were usually resolved without microsurgery (16%). Some 47.4% of the respondents reported being trained in units where there were no requirements of minimal logbooks for microsurgery.

The survey also showed that 48.4% of the respondents would consider applying to a microsurgery fellowship, but only 63.4% had access to a fellowship program in their home country. Among the trainees who expressed an interest in pursuing a career in microsurgery, a multiple-response question revealed that the main areas of interest were breast reconstruction (65%), limb reconstruction (58%), head and neck reconstruction (27%) and lymphedema surgery (14%).

Discussion

Although there are many board-certified plastic surgeons in Latin America, microsurgery is not a commonly used procedure. We theorized that this was a result of lack of training opportunities during residency. This study sought to identify strategies to enhance microsurgery training by assessing its current status. Our study showed that only 46.2% of the surveyed Latin American plastic surgery residents had actually performed at least one microsurgical procedure as part of their residency. This figure is in stark contrast to the exposure gained by surgeons in other countries, most notably the USA, where microsurgery is an incorporated part of the curriculum. Mueller et al. evaluated different aspects of microsurgery training and found that 94% of the programs in the US had access to training microscopes for residents [6].

Our survey further showed that while 96.8% of respondents had observed at least one microsurgery throughout their training, just 25.8% had been involved in more than 20 procedures. While 90.3% of the respondents were able to scrub and assist, only 25.8% had done so in more than 20 operations.

An increased exposure of residents to microsurgeries would certainly be beneficial for such countries. Studies show that performing these complicated operations by residents under supervision has no significant impact on the percentage of complications that occur. They also demonstrate that basic lab microsurgery training can enable residents to work independently in the operating room with a low risk of complications [7,8].

Learning how to use a surgical microscope using non-living models is a useful method to practice and handle equipment, and to gain experience in micro suture procedures. It also gives students more confidence to practice on living models [9-11]. However, rat models are still essential for learning advanced techniques such as continuous stitching sutures, organ transplants, and working with vessels with a size discrepancy [12-17]. It is significant to mention that more than half of the respondents did not have access to simulated microsurgery during their residence, despite empirical evidence suggesting that surgeons with prior training perform better than those without [18,19]. For example, the United Kingdom stipulates that in order to qualify as a certified plastic surgeon, a trainee has to perform a minimum of 27 free tissue transfers as primary operator.

According to Maldonado and Song, microsurgery requires a high level of precision and development of exact skills. Hence it is essential that trainees should be gradually introduced to these procedures with the ultimate goal of gaining the ability of doing them independently and with repeatable results [20]. Numerous studies have shown that fellowships speed up the learning process, as they provide training in microsurgical reconstruction rather than focusing solely on the microsurgery technique [21].

A study by Ezra et al. showed that, regardless of their baseline ability level, all fellows improved over the course of the year, the overall skill gap closed dramatically, and almost all fellows were able to master microsurgery to a high level. Furthermore, fellows with lower initial assessments improved their technical abilities faster, whereas those with higher initial assessments improved their speed and efficiency the most [22]. According to studies, completing a fellowship not only enhances technical skills but also contributes to clinical decision-making, research, and dealing with experimental questions in microsurgery [23-25].

We believe that before performing microsurgical procedures on real patients, trainees should practice their abilities in the lab until they are proficient. Even though international opportunities and fellowships could benefit the field of microsurgery in Latin American countries, it is crucial to improve fundamental training to build a strong base. Without fundamental training, it is likely that residents would find it challenging to perform procedures in an international fellowship.

Further, fifty-four responders (58.1%) believed that one needs at least 25 flaps experience to become a skilled microsurgeon. This corresponds with Chan’s recommendation of an exposure of 10 to 25 microsurgery cases per year to maintain technical skills, with 25 to 50 cases per year rated "optimal" exposure [26]. Scholz showed that early-career microsurgery training, especially for medical students, helps in not only improving technical skills but also increases the number of microsurgeons in the field [27].

The field of microsurgery is constantly improving and expanding, with increased demand not only in specialized institutions but also in general hospitals [28]. The study presented here reveals the status of microsurgical training opportunities in Latin America. Few residents were able to gain the level of experience required to act as independent microsurgeons. We have identified three main reasons for this based on the following findings. To begin with, there is a lack of lab training that is available to residents. There is also the issue that there are not enough instructors to allow students to practice in operating rooms. The third issue is that there are not enough fellowship positions available in the field of microsurgery.

This study has several limitations as it is limited in its coverage. It does not cover all the residency programs or all of the countries in Latin America. Therefore, it is not representative of the entire area, despite the high response rate and getting responses from countries with the largest departments in the region.

Conclusion

There is ample room for improvement in microsurgical training in the region. It will take time and effort to address this problem. Increased opportunities in the operating room must be combined with mandatory microsurgery training as part of residency programs. Additionally, in our opinion, having access to foreign microsurgical fellows can be a potent weapon for reversing the current regional shortage. Fellowships allow local plastic surgeons to gain high-volume experience in a limited period of time. An influx of returning trained microsurgeons would allow increasing the caseload while improving the training of future generations of microsurgeons.

References

  1. Moon SJ, Hong JP, Kang SR, Suh HS. Survey of reconstructive microsurgery training in Korea. J Reconstr Microsurg 2015;31(1):54-58. [View Article]
  2. Lascar I, Totir D, Cinca A, et al. Training program and learning curve in experimental microsurgery during the residency in plastic surgery. Microsurgery 2007;27(4):263-267. [View Article]
  3. Blackwell KE, Brown MT, Gonzalez D. Overcoming the learning curve in microvascular head and neck reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;123(12):1332-1335. [View Article]
  4. Culliford ATt, Spector J, Blank A, Karp NS, Kasabian A, Levine JP. The fate of lower extremities with failed free flaps: A single institution's experience over 25 years. Ann Plast Surg 2007;59(1):18-21; discussion 21-12. [View Article]
  5. MacKechnie MC, Flores MJ, Giordano V, et al. Management of soft-tissue coverage of open tibia fractures in Latin America: Techniques, timing, and resources. Injury 2022;53(4):1422-1429. [View Article]
  6. Mueller MA, Pourtaheri N, Evans GRD. Microsurgery training resource variation among US integrated plastic surgery residency programs. J Reconstr Microsurg 2019;35(3):176-181. [View Article]
  7. Jubbal KT, Echo A, Spiegel AJ, Izaddoost SA. The impact of resident involvement in breast reconstruction surgery outcomes by modality: An analysis of 4,500 cases. Microsurgery 2017;37(7):800-807. [View Article]
  8. Cho MJ, Halani SH, Davis J, Zhang AY. Achieving balance between resident autonomy and patient safety: Analysis of resident-led microvascular reconstruction outcomes at a microsurgical training center with an established microsurgical training pathway. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2020;73(1):118-125. [View Article]
  9. Lannon DA, Atkins JA, Butler PE. Non-vital, prosthetic, and virtual reality models of microsurgical training. Microsurgery 2001;21(8):389-393. [View Article]
  10. Mattar T, Santos GBD, Telles JPM, Rezende MR, Wei TH, Mattar Junior R. Structured evaluation of a comprehensive microsurgical training program. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2021;76:e3194. [View Article]
  11. Crosby NL, Clapson JB, Buncke HJ, Newlin L. Advanced non-animal microsurgical exercises. Microsurgery 1995;16(9):655-658. [View Article]
  12. Kim DC, Hayward PG, Morrison WA. Training model for microvessel anastomosis. Microsurgery 1994;15(11):820-821. [View Article]
  13. Shurey S, Akelina Y, Legagneux J, Malzone G, Jiga L, Ghanem AM. The rat model in microsurgery education: Classical exercises and new horizons. Arch Plast Surg 2014;41(3):201-208. [View Article]
  14. Miyamoto S, Okazaki M, Ohura N, Shiraishi T, Takushima A, Harii K. Comparative study of different combinations of microvascular anastomoses in a rat model: End-to-end, end-to-side, and flow-through anastomosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;122(2):449-455. [View Article]
  15. Sakrak T, Kose AA, Karabagli Y, Kocman AE, Ozbayoglu AC, Cetin C. Rat tail revascularization model for advanced microsurgery training and research. J Reconstr Microsurg 2011;27(7):391-396. [View Article]
  16. Wang H, Gu Y, Dong Z. Rat-tail replantation model. J Reconstr Microsurg 1999;15(3):203-206. [View Article]
  17. Galvao FH, Bacchella T, Cerqueira Machado M. Teaching intestinal transplantation in the rat for medical student. Microsurgery 2007;27(4):277-281. [View Article]
  18. Boecker A, Kornmann J, Xiong L, et al. A structured, microsurgical training curriculum improves the outcome in lower extremity reconstruction free flap residency training: The Ludwigshafen concept. J Reconstr Microsurg 2021;37(6):492-502. [View Article]
  19. Park JW, Moon J, Lee KT, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes of free flap reconstructions performed by expert microsurgeons and trainees who completed a structured microsurgical training program in a teaching hospital. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2020;73(10):1834-1844. [View Article]
  20. Maldonado AA, Song DH. European and American microsurgery training programs: The fellowship concept difference. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;136(2):292e-293e. [View Article]
  21. Kania K, Chang DK, Abu-Ghname A, et al. Microsurgery training in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020;8(7):e2898. [View Article]
  22. Ezra DG, Aggarwal R, Michaelides M, et al. Skills acquisition and assessment after a microsurgical skills course for ophthalmology residents. Ophthalmology 2009;116(2):257-262. [View Article]
  23. Lineaweaver WC. Microsurgery, complex reconstruction, and fellowships. Microsurgery 2002;22(5):175-176. [View Article]
  24. Sullivan BJ, Maliha S, Henderson PW. Microsurgery fellows' impression of clinical and educational offerings during fellowship year. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020;36(3):191-196. [View Article]
  25. Reghunathan M, Zaldana-Flynn M, Rose J, Crisera CA, Reid CM. The ideal microsurgery fellowship: A survey of fellows and fellowship directors. J Reconstr Microsurg 2021;37(2):167-173. [View Article]
  26. Chan WY, Srinivasan JR, Ramakrishnan VV. Microsurgery training today and future. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010;63(6):1061-1063. [View Article]
  27. Scholz M, Mucke T, Holzle F, et al. A program of microsurgical training for young medical students: Are younger students better? Microsurgery 2006;26(6):450-455. [View Article]
  28. Masia J, Sanchez-Porro L, Vega C, et al. New paradigms in reconstructive microsurgery education. Ann Plast Surg 2019;83(3):243-246. [View Article]

Editorial Information

Publication History

Received date: June 17, 2022
Accepted date: August 18, 2022
Published date: October 31, 2022

Disclosure

The manuscript has not been presented at any meetings on the topic.

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

The study is in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was exempted from review by the Institutional Review Board.

Funding

This research has received no specific grant from any funding agency either in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflict of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest declared by either the authors or the contributors of this article, which is their intellectual property.

Publisher Disclaimer

It should be noted that the opinions and statements expressed in this article are those of the respective author(s) and are not to be regarded as factual statements. These opinions and statements may not represent the views of their affiliated organizations, the publishing house, the editors, or any other reviewers since these are the sole opinion and statement of the author(s). The publisher does not guarantee or endorse any of the statements that are made by the manufacturer of any product discussed in this article, or any statements that are made by the author(s) in relation to the mentioned product.

Copyright

© 2022 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY). In accordance with accepted academic practice, anyone may use, distribute, or reproduce this material, so long as the original author(s), the copyright holder(s), and the original publication of this journal are credited, and this publication is cited as the original. To the extent permitted by these terms and conditions of license, this material may not be compiled, distributed, or reproduced in any manner that is inconsistent with those terms and conditions.

Reconstructive Microsurgery Service, University Department of Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation, San Giuseppe Hospital, IRCCS MultiMedica Group, Milan, Italy
Reconstructive Microsurgery Service, University Department of Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation, San Giuseppe Hospital, IRCCS MultiMedica Group, Milan, Italy
Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Surgery Division, School of Medicine, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, Santiago, Chile
Plastic and Microsurgery Service, Hospital Pasteur, Montevideo, Uruguay
Plastic Surgery Division, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Brazil
Plastic and Reconstructive Service, Hospital General de Zona 32 IMSS, Mexico City, Mexico
  1. Group for Academic Plastic Surgery, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
  2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
  1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
  2. Kellogg College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Reconstructive Microsurgery Service, University Department of Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation, San Giuseppe Hospital, IRCCS MultiMedica Group, Milan, Italy
Email: macarena@vizcay.com.ar
Address: Via San Vittore 12, 20123 Milan, Italy
Table 1.jpgSurvey on the Training of Microsurgery in Latin America

Table 2.jpgA Statistical Analysis of Surveys Conducted among Eligible Participants at Training Centers in Five Countries

Figure 1.JPG
Figure 1. The distribution of procedures with eligible participants observing (A), assisting (B), or performing them themselves (C). The results of the questionnaire reveal that 96.8% of the respondents have observed at least one microsurgery procedure. In addition, 90.3% have assisted in at least one microsurgery procedure based on their responses to the questionnaire. Of the surveyed trainees, 25.8% have scrubbed in more than 20 procedures.

Reviewer 1 Comments

  1. The survey has a response rate of 72 percent, which is a satisfactory response rate. According to the study's questionnaire, there are 15 questions pertaining to several segments that represent the current state of this issue. To ensure an accurate assessment of the state of microsurgical training in Latin America, respondents from a wide variety of Latin American countries were incorporated into this study. The study was well designed, and I believe it is of paramount importance as it highlights the value of microsurgical training for residents who specialize in reconstructive surgery. The results of the survey indicate that some aspects of the training need to be modified and improved. In the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery, microsurgery is a vital subspecialty. As this study demonstrates, microsurgery can be advanced to a higher level of training and sustainably maintained as a specialty in this field. In view of the significance of the article to the readers of the journal, it is recommended that this article be published in the journal after addressing a few issues. 
    ResponseThank you for your thoughtful comments.

Reviewer 2 Comments

  1. In this study, the authors conducted a 15-question survey to investigate microsurgery training in residency in Latin America. This study has provided valuable insight into the current state of microsurgery training in this area and suggested a strategy for improving it. There are a few issues that I believe need to be addressed before this paper can be published. My suggestion is that the authors revise their paper to provide more context about microsurgery training in Latin America and to improve clarity.
    ResponseThank you for taking the time to provide us with thoughtful feedback.
     
  2. In the Introduction, the authors did not clearly state the problem that they were trying to address. Having a problem "looked at" does not necessarily imply that it is a significant problem, nor does it imply that it is one. It would be helpful if the authors proposed problems such as "lack of training opportunities is responsible for the lack of microsurgeons in Latin America". The authors may then state that the purpose of this study is to determine strategies for improving micro training by analyzing its current state.
    ResponseIn response to your point, we have included it in the introduction as follows: Despite reports that the region has a sufficient number of certified plastic surgeons, there are few trained microsurgeons, and not all regions are capable of performing microsurgery procedures. The objective of this study is to identify strategies that can be used to improve microsurgery training by examining its current state.
     
  3. Readers would benefit from the information provided in the Results section about the residency programs at these five centers. This includes duration, the number of microsurgeon mentors, the number of residents in total, the number of microsurgery cases per year, and the number of resident cases per year. How many micro fellowship programs are available? Readers can obtain a comprehensive view of micro training in Latin America from these data.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. This type of analysis was not possible to include in this study, despite the fact that it would have been an excellent addition. It will, however, be taken into account in the following study.
     
  4. The results should be presented in the order in which the questions were asked. The authors presented the results beginning with Q7, Q8, and Q9, before referring back to Q3, Q4, and Q5. The questions are not numbered in the order in which they appear in the sequence. As a result, the results are not clearly organized and appear unclear.
    ResponseDue to your suggestion, we have changed the order. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
     
  5. Data should be presented in the order in which they were collected in the survey. The answer to each question without editing by the authors will be of interest to the readers. For example, in Q4 and Q5, the authors have combined their results and reported 51.6% as having either living or non-living model training. However, they are two separate and independent questions. They may be able to provide information regarding the training model used by the residents. In addition, evidence suggests that residents are able to improve their skills through the use of some non-living models during basic skill training. In light of these findings, strategies could be discussed for improving the fundamental technique of microsurgery training.
    ResponseAccording to your suggestion, we have added the following information: Of all participants, 51.6% had experience with simulated non-living models and 49.5% had experience with living models during microsurgical training.
     
  6. I was unable to locate the data for Q3. It is possible that the authors have changed the words used to present the data for this question. The questions should remain the same. In this way, the reader can easily locate them and won't be confused.
    ResponseThe sentence has been reformulated as follows: 79.6 percent of residents had been involved in performing a microsurgical procedure either in a clinical setting or in a simulation.
     
  7. I would suggest organizing questions 4-15 into three major catalogs and using subtitles (lab training for questions 4 and 5; clinic training for questions 6-12; and post-residency training for questions 13-15). It may be easier for the reader to understand if this is done.
    ResponseIn response to your suggestion, we have added this information. Our survey was organized into three major catalogs: laboratory training, clinic training, and post-residency training.
     
  8. With respect to Q15, please explain why the percentage exceeds 100%.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. The reason for this is that some residents have an additional area of interest that they are passionate about. This information has been added to the text as follows: Among trainees who wish to pursue a career in microsurgery, a multiple-response question revealed that breast reconstruction (65%), limb reconstruction (58%), head and neck reconstruction (27%) and lymphedema surgery (14%) were the main areas of interest.
     
  9. There is a lack of organization in the Discussion and Conclusion sections, and the conclusions are not sufficiently clear and conclusive. In light of the data, I believe it is appropriate to draw three conclusions, if the authors are in agreement: (1) Lab training was not readily available; (2) Practice in the operating room was inadequate due to a lack of teachers and cases; and (3) Fellowships in microsurgery were not readily available.
    ResponseThe perspective was appreciated and incorporated into the text. This can be attributed to three main reasons: (1) residents do not have sufficient access to laboratory training; (2) there is a lack of teachers and cases to practice in the operating room; and (3) microsurgery fellowships are not available in sufficient numbers.
     
  10. It would be helpful to organize the discussion in accordance with the conclusions. This is a reversed approach to writing. The discussion should provide an interpretation of the results and an explanation of their implications. It is recommended that the authors present their findings as well as review the findings of the existing literature and compare their findings with those of the existing literature. In my opinion, the authors did not make a conclusive statement regarding what these results imply. It is pertinent to establish these implications from the results in order to support the conclusions that are to be drawn. Furthermore, I recommend that the author summarize the introduction and objectives of this study in the first paragraph of the Discussion section. The first paragraph of the Discussion is unclear as to what the authors are trying to convey. Only 46.2% of the residents who performed one case during residency were included in the study. The authors cited evidence of a lack of surgical opportunities and referenced a study that discussed a lack of access to microscope training equipment in the United States, as well as the fact that UK-certified surgeons were required to perform 27 operations. It is difficult to understand what the authors are proposing because of this evidence and inconsistent findings. 
    ResponseThank you for your insightful comments. We reformulated the discussion part as per your insightful suggestion as follows: Learning how to use a surgical microscope using non-living models is a useful method to practice and handle equipment, and to gain experience in micro suture procedures. It also gives students more confidence to practice on living models. However, rat models are still essential for learning advanced techniques such as continuous stitching sutures, organ transplants, and working with vessels with a size discrepancy. It is significant to mention that more than half of the respondents did not have access to simulated microsurgery during their residence, despite empirical evidence suggesting that surgeons with prior training perform better than those without. For example, the United Kingdom stipulates that in order to qualify as a certified plastic surgeon, a trainee has to perform a minimum of 27 free tissue transfers as primary operator.
     
  11. The authors present the results to demonstrate that residents did not have the opportunity to participate in clinical practice. They cited two papers for evidence that residents involved in or leading microsurgeries would not lead to more complications. However, I believe it is even more valuable to point out that the residents in these papers have completed a microsurgery training program. As a result, microsurgery training in the basic lab can contribute to residents' autonomy in the operating room with a low risk of complications.
    ResponseIt was very insightful of you to make such a thoughtful comment, and we have added this to the text.
     
  12. Reference number 9 is not appropriate for this context, as it pertains to the basic science of fat grafting.
    ResponseWe have deleted this reference in response to your suggestion.
     
  13. Reference numbers 23-25 are not appropriate, please verify them. Only Reference number 23 should be used if the citation is based solely on Ezra et al. The paper by Eara et al. discusses the development of ophthalmology residents' skills. It was my understanding that this paper would not have addressed the content the authors presented here about how the fellow improves their micro skills over the course of the fellowship year.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. In response to your suggestion, Reference numbers 24 and 25 have been deleted.
     
  14. The limitations of the study should be discussed. Is it representative of Latin America as a whole? What are the similarities and differences between the training systems in these countries? Do the training systems in these countries follow the same principles? There may be some training centers that are not included in these countries.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. The manuscript has been revised accordingly as follows: The study has several limitations due to its limited scope. It does not cover all the residency programs or all of the countries in Latin America. Therefore, it is not representative of the entire area, despite the high response rate and getting responses from countries with the largest departments in the region.
     
  15. According to the authors, there may be an advantage to accessing international fellowships in microsurgery in the future. It would also be beneficial to improve the basic training, including micro technique training, cadaver training, and simulator training of clinical cases. It is unlikely that the resident will be able to perform surgery in the international fellowship if they do not have a solid foundation of knowledge and fundamental microsurgery skills. It is essential for all trainees to become proficient at microsurgery in the laboratory. It is unsafe, unfair, and unethical for trainees to practice on real patients without first mastering their basic technique.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. The manuscript has been revised accordingly as follows: We believe that before performing microsurgical procedures on real patients, trainees should practice their abilities in the lab until they are proficient. Even though international opportunities and fellowships could benefit the field of microsurgery in Latin American countries, it is crucial to improve fundamental training to build a strong base. Without fundamental training, it is likely that residents would find it challenging to perform procedures in an international fellowship.
     
  16. The conclusion should be more accurate and concise. The suggestion I made at the beginning should be taken into consideration. The authors did not draw clear conclusions from the results and discussions. I assumed that they would conclude that there is a dearth of fellowship opportunities in Latin America. However, rather than presenting the conclusion directly, they stated that "international microsurgical fellows can be a powerful tool for changing the regional situation." This seemed like a strategy for the future to enhance microsurgical training, rather than a conclusion.
    ResponseThanks for your comments. The manuscript has been revised accordingly as follows: There is ample room for improvement in microsurgical training in the region. It will take time and effort to address this problem. Increased opportunities in the operating room must be combined with mandatory microsurgery training as part of residency programs. Additionally, in our opinion, having access to foreign microsurgical fellows can be a potent weapon for reversing the current regional shortage. Fellowships allow local plastic surgeons to gain high-volume experience in a limited period of time. An influx of returning trained microsurgeons would allow increasing the caseload while improving the training of future generations of microsurgeons.

Reviewer 3 Comments

  1. In a well-organized manner, detailed information about the survey in Latin American countries was presented in the study. As a reader, however, I would like to see detailed surveys for each of the countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay) in order to compare the situation in each of them. In spite of this, it is left up to the authors to decide if they would like to expand their investigation.
    ResponseYour thoughtful feedback is greatly appreciated. We agree that this is an excellent idea, but it wasn't the purpose of this study to investigate that. I appreciate the suggestion you have provided, and we will take it into account when we perform a more in-depth analysis of the situation in the future.     

Vizcay M, Troisi L, Navia A, Lopez A, Nicolas G, Miranda E, Pafitanis G, Berner JE. Microsurgery training in Latin America: A survey of residents’ experiences. Int Microsurg J. 2022;6(2):1. https://doi.org/10.24983/scitemed.imj.2022.00166