From telementorship to automation

Emergency robotic surgery: the experience of a single center and review of the literature

BACKGROUNDS

Laparoscopic surgery is widely used in abdominal emergency surgery (AES), and the possibility of extending this approach to the more recent robotic surgery (RS) arouses great interest. The slow diffusion of robotic technology mainly due to high costs and the longer RS operative time when compared to laparoscopy may represent disincentives, especially in AES. This study aims to report our experience in the use of RS in AES assessing its safety and feasibility, with particular focus on intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rate, and surgical learning curve. Our data were also compared to other experiences though an extensive literature review.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a single surgeon series of the last 10 years. From January 2014 to December 2023, 36 patients underwent urgent or emergency RS. The robotic devices used were Da Vinci Si (15 cases) and Xi (21 cases).

RESULTS

36 (4.3%) out of 834 robotic procedures were included in our analysis: 20 (56.56%) females. The mean age was 63 years and 30% of patients were ≥ 70 years. 2 (5.55%) procedures were performed at night. No conversions to open were reported in this series. According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, 2 (5.5%) major complications were collected. Intraoperative and 30-day mortality were 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that RS may be a useful and reliable approach also to AES and intraoperative laparoscopic complications when performed in selected hemodynamically stable patients in very well-trained robotic centers. The technology may increase the minimally invasive use and conversion rate in emergent settings in a completely robotic or hybrid approach.

Technologies Used for Telementoring in Open Surgery: A Scoping Review

Background: Telementoring technologies enable a remote mentor to guide a mentee in real-time during surgical procedures. This addresses challenges, such as lack of expertise and limited surgical training/education opportunities in remote locations. This review aims to provide a comprehensive account of these technologies tailored for open surgery. Methods: A comprehensive scoping review of the scientific literature was conducted using PubMed, ScienceDirect, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore databases. Broad and inclusive searches were done to identify articles reporting telementoring or teleguidance technologies in open surgery. Results: Screening of the search results yielded 43 articles describing surgical telementoring for open approach. The studies were categorized based on the type of open surgery (surgical specialty, surgical procedure, and stage of clinical trial), the telementoring technology used (information transferred between mentor and mentee, devices used for rendering the information), and assessment of the technology (experience level of mentor and mentee, study design, and assessment criteria). Majority of the telementoring technologies focused on trauma-related surgeries and mixed reality headsets were commonly used for rendering information (telestrations, surgical tools, or hand gestures) to the mentee. These technologies were primarily assessed on high-fidelity synthetic phantoms. Conclusions: Despite longer operative time, these telementoring technologies demonstrated clinical viability during open surgeries through improved performance and confidence of the mentee. In general, usage of immersive devices and annotations appears to be promising, although further clinical trials will be required to thoroughly assess its benefits.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Remote teaching system for robotic surgery and its validation: results of a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Currently, only a limited number of remote assistance modalities are utilized in the basic phase of robotic surgery training to facilitate the rapid acquisition of robotic surgery skills by surgeons. This study aimed to investigate the benefits of real-time remote surgical robotic skill training based on a multi-channel video recording and playback system.

METHODS

We randomly divided 40 medical students without prior expertise in the use of surgical robots into two groups to assess the performance of trainees on a robotic simulator (Mimic dV-Trainer). The remote group received remote training, while the control group received live one-on-one guidance. We compared the learning curves of the two groups based on simulator scores. Furthermore, the NASA task load index (NASA-TLX) scale was used to measure the fatigue load of the trainers.

RESULTS

We observed no significant differences in the demographics or initial baseline skill levels between the two groups. Participants in the remote group achieved higher total scores in the Match Board 2 and Thread the Rings 1 exercises compared to the control group. In addition, trainers in the remote group reported lower subjective fatigue load than in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The remote approach to surgical robotics skills training based on the Remote Teaching System for Robotic Surgery (ReTeRoS) is both feasible and has the potential for large-scale training.

Robotic surgery in emergency setting: 2021 WSES position paper

Background

Robotics represents the most technologically advanced approach in minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Its application in general surgery has increased progressively, with some early experience reported in emergency settings. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a systematic review of the literature to develop consensus statements about the potential use of robotics in emergency general surgery.

Methods

This position paper was conducted according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee was constituted to draft the position paper according to the literature review. An international expert panel then critically revised the manuscript. Each statement was voted through a web survey to reach a consensus.

Results

Ten studies (3 case reports, 3 case series, and 4 retrospective comparative cohort studies) have been published regarding the applications of robotics for emergency general surgery procedures. Due to the paucity and overall low quality of evidence, 6 statements are proposed as expert opinions. In general, the experts claim for a strict patient selection while approaching emergent general surgery procedures with robotics, eventually considering it for hemodynamically stable patients only. An emergency setting should not be seen as an absolute contraindication for robotic surgery if an adequate training of the operating surgical team is available. In such conditions, robotic surgery can be considered safe, feasible, and associated with surgical outcomes related to an MIS approach. However, there are some concerns regarding the adoption of robotic surgery for emergency surgeries associated with the following: (i) the availability and accessibility of the robotic platform for emergency units and during night shifts, (ii) expected longer operative times, and (iii) increased costs. Further research is necessary to investigate the role of robotic surgery in emergency settings and to explore the possibility of performing telementoring and telesurgery, which are particularly valuable in emergency situations.

Conclusions

Many hospitals are currently equipped with a robotic surgical platform which needs to be implemented efficiently. The role of robotic surgery for emergency procedures remains under investigation. However, its use is expanding with a careful assessment of costs and timeliness of operations. The proposed statements should be seen as a preliminary guide for the surgical community stressing the need for reevaluation and update processes as evidence expands in the relevant literature.