1
|
Corcione A, Angelini P, Bencini L, Bertellini E, Borghi F, Buccelli C, Coletta G, Esposito C, Graziano V, Guarracino F, Marchi D, Misitano P, Mori AM, Paternoster M, Pennestrì V, Perrone V, Pugliese L, Romagnoli S, Scudeller L, Corcione F. Joint consensus on abdominal robotic surgery and anesthesia from a task force of the SIAARTI and SIC. Minerva Anestesiol 2018; 84:1189-1208. [PMID: 29648413 DOI: 10.23736/s0375-9393.18.12241-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Minimally invasive surgical procedures have revolutionized the world of surgery in the past decades. While laparoscopy, the first minimally invasive surgical technique to be developed, is widely used and has been addressed by several guidelines and recommendations, the implementation of robotic-assisted surgery is still hindered by the lack of consensus documents that support healthcare professionals in the management of this novel surgical procedure. Here we summarize the available evidence and provide expert opinion aimed at improving the implementation and resolution of issues derived from robotic abdominal surgery procedures. A joint task force of Italian surgeons, anesthesiologists and clinical epidemiologists reviewed the available evidence on robotic abdominal surgery. Recommendations were graded according to the strength of evidence. Statements and recommendations are provided for general issues regarding robotic abdominal surgery, operating theatre organization, preoperative patient assessment and preparation, intraoperative management, and postoperative procedures and discharge. The consensus document provides evidence-based recommendations and expert statements aimed at improving the implementation and management of robotic abdominal surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonio Corcione
- Department of Critical Care Area, A.O. Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Pierluigi Angelini
- Department of General, Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery, A.O. Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Lapo Bencini
- Division of Surgical Oncology and Robotics, Department of Oncology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Bertellini
- Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, New Civile S. Agostino-Estense, Policlinico Hospital, Modena, Italy
| | - Felice Borghi
- Division of General and Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, S. Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy
| | - Claudio Buccelli
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Coletta
- Division of Operating Room Management, Department of Emergency and Critical Care, S. Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy
| | - Clelia Esposito
- Department of Critical Care Area, A.O. Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Graziano
- Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Cardiothoracic Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Guarracino
- Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Cardiothoracic Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Domenico Marchi
- Department of General Surgery, New Civile S. Agostino-Estense, Policlinico Hospital, Modena, Italy
| | - Pasquale Misitano
- Unit of General and Mini-Invasive Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Anna M Mori
- Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, IRCCS Policlinic San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy
| | - Mariano Paternoster
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Pennestrì
- Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Vittorio Perrone
- Department of General and Transplant Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Luigi Pugliese
- Unit of General Surgery 2, IRCCS Policlinic San Matteo, Foundation, Pavia, Italy
| | - Stefano Romagnoli
- Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Luigia Scudeller
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, Scientific Direction, IRCCS Policlinic San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy -
| | - Francesco Corcione
- Department of General, Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery, A.O. Ospedali dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Szold A, Bergamaschi R, Broeders I, Dankelman J, Forgione A, Langø T, Melzer A, Mintz Y, Morales-Conde S, Rhodes M, Satava R, Tang CN, Vilallonga R. European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery. Surg Endosc 2014; 29:253-88. [PMID: 25380708 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3916-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 98] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2014] [Accepted: 09/19/2014] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Following an extensive literature search and a consensus conference with subject matter experts the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Robotic surgery is still at its infancy, and there is a great potential in sophisticated electromechanical systems to perform complex surgical tasks when these systems evolve. 2. To date, in the vast majority of clinical settings, there is little or no advantage in using robotic systems in general surgery in terms of clinical outcome. Dedicated parameters should be addressed, and high quality research should focus on quality of care instead of routine parameters, where a clear advantage is not to be expected. 3. Preliminary data demonstrates that robotic system have a clinical benefit in performing complex procedures in confined spaces, especially in those that are located in unfavorable anatomical locations. 4. There is a severe lack of high quality data on robotic surgery, and there is a great need for rigorously controlled, unbiased clinical trials. These trials should be urged to address the cost-effectiveness issues as well. 5. Specific areas of research should include complex hepatobiliary surgery, surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, revisional surgery in bariatric and upper GI surgery, surgery for large adrenal masses, and rectal surgery. All these fields show some potential for a true benefit of using current robotic systems. 6. Robotic surgery requires a specific set of skills, and needs to be trained using a dedicated, structured training program that addresses the specific knowledge, safety issues and skills essential to perform this type of surgery safely and with good outcomes. It is the responsibility of the corresponding professional organizations, not the industry, to define the training and credentialing of robotic basic skills and specific procedures. 7. Due to the special economic environment in which robotic surgery is currently employed special care should be taken in the decision making process when deciding on the purchase, use and training of robotic systems in general surgery. 8. Professional organizations in the sub-specialties of general surgery should review these statements and issue detailed, specialty-specific guidelines on the use of specific robotic surgery procedures in addition to outlining the advanced robotic surgery training required to safely perform such procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amir Szold
- Technology Committee, EAES, Assia Medical Group, P.O. Box 58048, Tel Aviv, 61580, Israel,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|