Laparoscopic vascular anastomoses: does robotic (Zeus–Aesop) assistance help to overcome the learning curve?

Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery is today well-implemented in many surgical specialties, but requires another skill set than laparoscopy. Most often, robot-assisted surgery is considered add-on to laparoscopic skills but very little is known about the transfer of skills. The aim of the study was to examine to what extent surgical skills are transferable between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, and Web of Science). Studies investigating transfer of skills between laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery in either a phantom-based, simulation-based, animal model, or clinical setting were eligible for inclusion. Quality assessment was done using the Medical education research study quality instrument and educational New Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Of 15,610 studies identified, 89 studies continued to full-text reading, and 37 studies were included. Four studies were found non-comparable and were left out of the results for the primary outcome. All 33 studies explored transfer from laparoscopy to robot-assisted surgery and 17 found a positive transfer whereas 15 did not. Only 11 studies explored transfer from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy, of which only three found a positive transfer.

CONCLUSION

An almost equal number of publications found a positive transfer and no transfer from laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery. Fewer studies explored the transfer from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy. Very little evidence supports that surgeons trained solely in robot-assisted surgery can perform laparoscopy. This must be considered in future training programs as robot-assisted surgery is expected to become the first-in-line modality for many future surgeons.

Robot-assisted techniques in vascular and endovascular surgery

For thousands of years, robots have inspired the imagination of humans, but it was only about 35 years ago that a robot was used for the first time in medicine. Since then, robot-assisted procedures have become increasingly popular in urology, general surgical specialties, and gynecology. Robot-assisted vascular surgery was first introduced in 2002 and was thought to overcome the limitations of laparoscopy. However, it did not gain widespread popularity, and its usage is still limited to a few centers worldwide. Robot-assisted endovascular procedures, on the other hand, while still in its infancy, have become a promising alternative to existing techniques. The improvements of the robotic systems promote better surgical performance and reduce occupational hazards for vascular and endovascular surgeons. A comprehensive review of literature was performed using the search terms “robotic,” “robot assisted,” “vascular surgery,” and “aortic” for surgical procedures or “robotic,” “robot assisted,” and “endovascular” for endovascular procedures. Full text articles that were published between January 1990 and March 2021 were included. This review summarizes the development of the techniques for robot-assisted vascular and endovascular surgery in recent years, its outcomes, advantages, disadvantages, and perspectives.

[Robot-assisted operations in vascular surgery]

The article contains a systematic review of the literature dedicated to vascular robot-assisted operations, also discussing the use of robotic technologies in vascular surgery, their advantages and disadvantages. In so doing, we studied the experience of Russian and leading international surgical centres, comparing the reported outcomes by such parameters as the average duration of the operation, mean time of aortic cross-clamping, time spent for anastomosis formation, frequency of postoperative complications, etc. Benefits of robot-assisted operations allowed the latter to occupy the leading positions in various fields of surgery, although the use of robots in vascular surgery has only begun to gain popularity. A robotically assisted system eliminates the main shortcomings of laparoscopy and opens opportunities for expanding robot-assisted surgery in this field.

A Novel Successive Suturing Device for Laparoscopic Surgery

Suturing is one of the more tiresome and difficult tasks during laparoscopic surgeries. To cope with this problem, we aimed to develop a novel successive suturing device. A novel needle holding and locking mechanism is proposed to transfer the needle between the upper and bottom jaws. The device is straightforward to use with intuitive 2-trigger control, and it can perform successive suturing without the need of reload between stiches. Also, it is compact enough to be inserted through a 12-mm trocar. The feasibility of the device is verified through in vitro and in vivo experiments. It was found that the developed device was able to successfully close the wounds without any leakage. The developed successive suturing device offers an easy way of performing suture, and it will greatly help surgeons during laparoscopic surgeries.

Learning Curve of Robotic-Assisted Anastomosis: Shorter than the Laparoscopic Technique? An Educational Study

BACKGROUND

Achieving aortic anastomosis in laparoscopic surgery remains a technical challenge. The Da Vinci robot could theoretically counteract this issue by minimizing the technical challenge. The aim of this study was to compare the learning curves of performing vascular anastomoses by trainees without any experience using purely laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted techniques.

METHODS

Surgery residents were randomly included in the laparoscopic group (group A, n = 3) and the robotic group (group B, n = 3). They performed 10 end-to-end anastomoses on 18-mm-diameter tubular expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts. The parameters recorded were duration to complete the anastomosis and an indirect sealing quality evaluation (ISQE) defined as the following ratio: number of stitches with a distance of less than 4 mm/total number of stitches.

RESULTS

The mean duration to perform the anastomosis decreased from 2340 s (±64) for the first anastomosis to 651 s (±248) for the last in group A (P < 0.05) and from 1989 s (±556) to 801 s (±120) in group B (P < 0.05). The mean ISQE increased from 74% (±18) for the first anastomosis to 98% (±3) for the last in group A (P < 0.05) and decreased from 100% to 98% (±2) in group B (nonsignificant). The mean duration to perform the first anastomosis was lower in group B than in group A (P < 0.05). The mean duration to perform the last anastomosis was not significantly different between the groups. Sealing tended to be better in group B for the first anastomosis compared with group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive laparoscopic technique training demonstrates a learning curve to perform vascular anastomoses. The robotic-assisted technique tended to improve suturing skills and should be considered as a valuable tool to reduce the technical learning curve.

Smart tissue anastomosis robot (STAR): a vision-guided robotics system for laparoscopic suturing

This paper introduces the smart tissue anastomosis robot (STAR). Currently, the STAR is a proof-of-concept for a vision-guided robotic system featuring an actuated laparoscopic suturing tool capable of executing running sutures from image-based commands. The STAR tool is designed around a commercially available laparoscopic suturing tool that is attached to a custom-made motor stage and the STAR supervisory control architecture that enables a surgeon to select and track incisions and the placement of stitches. The STAR supervisory-control interface provides two modes: A manual mode that enables a surgeon to specify the placement of each stitch and an automatic mode that automatically computes equally-spaced stitches based on an incision contour. Our experiments on planar phantoms demonstrate that the STAR in either mode is more accurate, up to four times more consistent and five times faster than surgeons using state-of-the-art robotic surgical system, four times faster than surgeons using manual Endo360(°)®, and nine times faster than surgeons using manual laparoscopic tools.

How does the surgeon's experience of abdominal operations influence the learning curves for robot-assisted vascular anastomosis?

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic vascular anastomosis of abdominal aortic aneurysms is rarely performed and requires standardization. Here, we examined the impact of the surgeon's experience of abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery on the learning curve for robot-assisted endoscopic vascular anastomosis.

METHODS

Three vascular surgeons with more than 10 years' experience (group A), three vascular surgeons with less than 10 years' experience (group B), and three medical students with no experience (group C) of performing vascular surgery used the da Vinci surgical system to anastomose 8-mm-diameter vascular prostheses in an end-to-end manner with continuous 5-0 Prolene sutures. The procedure was performed five times by each participant. Outcomes were anastomosis time, number of actions, visual score, and pressure test. Snapping of the prolene thread was recorded as a procedural failure.

RESULTS

Procedural failure occurred only in group C (3/15 trials, 20%; P < 0.0001). Learning curves were apparent in all three groups for anastomosis time and in groups A and C for the number of actions. Between trials 1 and 5, learning curves were apparent in all three groups for anastomosis time and in groups A and C for the number of actions but were not apparent for leakage or visual score in any group. Visual score and leakage were not significantly different among the three groups in each trial (P = 0.10 and P = 0.45, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

By using the da Vinci surgical system, experienced vascular surgeons and surgically naive students showed marked improvements in vascular anastomosis techniques with a short period of training.

Clinical applications of robotic technology in vascular and endovascular surgery

BACKGROUND

Emerging robotic technologies are increasingly being used by surgical disciplines to facilitate and improve performance of minimally invasive surgery. Robot-assisted intervention has recently been introduced into the field of vascular surgery to potentially enhance laparoscopic vascular and endovascular capabilities. The objective of this study was to review the current status of clinical robotic applications in vascular surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in order to identify all published clinical studies related to robotic implementation in vascular intervention. Web-based search engines were searched using the keywords "surgical robotics," "robotic surgery," "robotics," "computer assisted surgery," and "vascular surgery" or "endovascular" for articles published between January 1990 and November 2009. An evaluation and critical overview of these studies is reported. In addition, an analysis and discussion of supporting evidence for robotic computer-enhanced telemanipulation systems in relation to their applications in laparoscopic vascular and endovascular surgery was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles reporting on clinical applications of robotics in laparoscopic vascular and endovascular surgery were detected. They were either case reports or retrospective patient series and prospective studies reporting laparoscopic vascular and endovascular treatments for patients using robotic technology. Minimal comparative clinical evidence to evaluate the advantages of robot-assisted vascular procedures was identified. Robot-assisted laparoscopic aortic procedures have been reported by several studies with satisfactory results. Furthermore, the use of robotic technology as a sole modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and expansion of its applications to splenic and renal artery aneurysm reconstruction have been described. Robotically steerable endovascular catheter systems have potential advantages over conventional catheterization systems. Promising results from applications in cardiac interventions and preclinical studies have urged their use in vascular surgery. Although successful applications in endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm and lower extremity arterial disease have been reported, published clinical experience with the endovascular robot is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic technology may enhance vascular surgical techniques given preclinical evidence and early clinical reports. Further clinical studies are required to quantify its advantages over conventional treatments and define its role in vascular and endovascular surgery.