Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a newly developed laparoscope manipulator for 10 patients with cholelithiasis

Surgical experience of using the endoscope manipulator robot EMARO in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: A case report

Robot-assisted surgery has advanced rapidly since the 1980s. However, new equipment is still needed to overcome problems in conventional endoscopic surgery, including unique risks, such as camera shake and communication difficulties between the operator and the scopist. EMARO, an endoscope manipulator robot, is the world's first pneumatically driven endoscope-holder robot that can operate flexibly and smoothly with the use of air pressure. We herein report the surgical experience of using EMARO in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. A 77-year-old Japanese man presented with bulging in the right groin area. After we diagnosed a right inguinal hernia, endoscopic inguinal hernia repair was performed. We selected the totally extraperitoneal approach with EMARO. The endoscopic procedure time was 100 minutes, and no intraoperative complications occurred. EMARO brings together features of smooth motion and good manipulation performance. This operation was performed safely and was comparable to a conventional operation completed with human assistants. Solo surgery with EMARO was beneficial in this inguinal hernia patient.

Next-generation robotic surgery--from the aspect of surgical robots developed by industry

At present, much of the research conducted worldwide focuses on extending the ability of surgical robots. One approach is to extend robotic dexterity. For instance, accessibility and dexterity of the surgical instruments remains the largest issue for reduced port surgery such as single port surgery or natural orifice surgery. To solve this problem, a great deal of research is currently conducted in the field of robotics. Enhancing the surgeon's perception is an approach that uses advanced sensor technology. The real-time data acquired through the robotic system combined with the data stored in the robot (such as the robot's location) provide a major advantage. This paper aims at introducing state-of-the-art products and pre-market products in this technological advancement, namely the robotic challenge in extending dexterity and hopefully providing the path to robotic surgery in the near future.

Attention-Aware Robotic Laparoscope Based on Fuzzy Interpretation of Eye-Gaze Patterns

Laparoscopic robots have been widely adopted in modern medical practice. However, explicitly interacting with these robots may increase the physical and cognitive load on the surgeon. An attention-aware robotic laparoscope system has been developed to free the surgeon from the technical limitations of visualization through the laparoscope. This system can implicitly recognize the surgeon's visual attention by interpreting the surgeon's natural eye movements using fuzzy logic and then automatically steer the laparoscope to focus on that viewing target. Experimental results show that this system can make the surgeon–robot interaction more effective, intuitive, and has the potential to make the execution of the surgery smoother and faster.

Concurrent use of a robotic uterine manipulator and a robotic laparoscope holder to achieve assistant-less solo laparoscopy: the double ViKY

Three patients requiring gynecological surgery had uterine manipulation using a VCare(®) controlled by a ViKY(®) at the same time as having a ViKY(®) robotic arm controlling the laparoscope. The setup time for each varied from 6-9 min for the uterine manipulator and 3-5 min for the laparoscope holder. In all cases (one endometriosis and two dermoid cysts) the operative field was good. Two patients were discharged within 24 h of surgery. One patient required an extra day in hospital after she went into acute urinary retention once the catheter was removed. This work demonstrated that assistant-less solo gynecological surgery is feasible using two ViKY robotic arms for both uterine manipulation and laparoscope holding.

A pneumatic laparoscope holder controlled by head movement

BACKGROUND

In traditional laparoscopic surgery, the laparoscope is handled by a camera assistant according to verbal instructions from the surgeon. Thus there is a strong need for a laparoscope holder who intuitively provides the appropriate view with excellent stability.

METHODS

A pneumatically driven robotic arm was developed to hold and manipulate a laparoscope. The robotic arm is operated by the user's head movement, which is measured with gyroscopes attached to the operator's head and body.

RESULTS

We confirmed experimentally that head tracking can be performed accurately using the proposed method. The experimental results indicated that the robotic camera holder has sufficient dynamic characteristics to quickly follow the operator's head movement.

CONCLUSIONS

A laparoscope holder control system has been developed. In this system, a laparoscope is held by a pneumatically driven robotic arm that is controlled to follow the operator's head movement. The experimental results prove the effectiveness of the system. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Solo-surgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a joystick-guided camera device: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of a joystick-controlled camera holder (Soloassist; Actormed, Barbing, Germany) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy as so-called solo-surgery compared with the standard operation.

METHODS

Of the 123 patients included in this study, 63 underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the Soloassist system and were compared with 60 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with human assistance. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, sex, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiology classification. The surgeons were divided into those highly experienced and those experienced with the new camera holder. The operation times were measured, including setup and dismantling of the system. The assessment also included complications, postoperative hospital stay, measurement of human resources in terms of personnel/minutes/operation, and subjective evaluation of the camera-guiding device by the surgeons.

RESULTS

The hospital stay and operation-related complications were not enhanced in the Soloassist group. The differences in core operation time (p = 0.008) and total operating time (p = 0.001) significantly favored the human assistant. Whereas the absolute duration of surgery was longer, the relative operating time (in personnel/minutes/operation) was significantly shorter (p < 0.001). In 4.8 % of the cases, the operation could not be performed completely with the camera-holding device. Clinically relevant postoperative complications did not occur. The experience of the surgeons did not differ significantly. The subjective evaluation regarding handling, image quality, effort, and satisfaction demonstrated high acceptance of the Soloassist system.

CONCLUSIONS

The camera-guiding device can be implemented without increased complications. The Soloassist system is safe and can be operated even by colleagues without system experience. All the surgeons rated their satisfaction with the system as very good to excellent. Although the operating times were longer than with the standard camera guidance, the absolute overall staff time was reduced.

Robot assistant versus human or another robot assistant in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The role of a robotic assistant in laparoscopic cholecystectomy is controversial. While some trials have shown distinct advantages of a robotic assistant over a human assistant others have not, and it is unclear which robotic assistant is best.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review are to assess the benefits and harms of a robot assistant versus human assistant or versus another robot assistant in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and to assess whether the robot can substitute the human assistant.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded (until February 2012) for identifying the randomised clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing robot assistants versus human assistants in laparoscopic cholecystectomy were considered for the review. Randomised clinical trials comparing different types of robot assistants were also considered for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified the trials for inclusion and independently extracted the data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on intention-to-treat analysis, when possible, using Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials with 560 patients. One trial involving 129 patients did not state the number of patients randomised to the two groups. In the remaining five trials 431 patients were randomised, 212 to the robot assistant group and 219 to the human assistant group. All the trials were at high risk of bias. Mortality and morbidity were reported in only one trial with 40 patients. There was no mortality or morbidity in either group. Mortality and morbidity were not reported in the remaining trials. Quality of life or the proportion of patients who were discharged as day-patient laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients were not reported in any trial. There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who required conversion to open cholecystectomy (2 trials; 4/63 (weighted proportion 6.4%) in the robot assistant group versus 5/70 (7.1%) in the human assistant group; RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.25 to 3.20). There was no significant difference in the operating time between the two groups (4 trials; 324 patients; MD 5.00 minutes; 95% CI -0.55 to 10.54). In one trial, about one sixth of the laparoscopic cholecystectomies in which a robot assistant was used required temporary use of a human assistant. In another trial, there was no requirement for human assistants. One trial did not report this information. It appears that there was little or no requirement for human assistants in the other three trials. There were no randomised trials comparing one type of robot versus another type of robot.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Robot assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not seem to offer any significant advantages over human assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, all trials had a high risk of systematic errors or bias (that is, risk of overestimation of benefit and underestimation of harm). All trials were small, with few or no outcomes. Hence, the risk of random errors (that is, play of chance) is high. Further randomised trials with low risk of bias or random errors are needed.

Minimally invasive single-site surgery for the digestive system: A technological review

Minimally Invasive Single Site (MISS) surgery is a better terminology to explain the novel concept of scarless surgery, which is increasingly making its way into clinical practice. But, there are some difficulties. We review the existing technologies for MISS surgery with regards to single-port devices, endoscope and camera, instruments, retractors and also the future perspectives for the evolution of MISS surgery. While we need to move ahead cautiously and wait for the development of appropriate technology, we believe that the “Ultimate form of Minimally Invasive Surgery” will be a hybrid form of MISS surgery and Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, complimented by technological innovations from the fields of robotics and computer-assisted surgery.

The feasibility of solo-surgeon living donor nephrectomy: initial experience using video-assisted minilaparotomy surgery

BACKGROUND

Today, many kinds of surgery are being conducted without human assistants. Living donor nephrectomy (LDN) using video-assisted minilaparotomy surgery (VAM) has been performed by solo-surgeon using Unitrac® (Aesculap Surgical Instrument, Germany). We examined the results from VAM-solo-surgeon living donor nephrectomy (SLDN) and conventional VAM-human-assisted living donor nephrectomy (HLDN).

METHODS

Between July 2007 and April 2008, 82 cases of VAM-LDN were performed by two surgeons. From these cases, we randomly assigned 35 cases to undergo solo-surgery (group I) and the other 47 cases to undergo surgery with one human assistant (group II). All VAM-LDN procedures were performed in the same manner. Only the roles of a first assistant were substituted by the Unitrac® in group I. We compared the perioperative and postoperative data, including operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospital stay, between the two groups. We also investigated cases that developed complications.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the patient demographic data between the two groups (P > 0.05). The mean operative time was 201.9 ± 32.9 min in group I and 202.4 ± 48.3 min in group II (P = 0.954), whereas mean blood loss was 209.7 ± 167.3 ml in group I and 179.6 ± 87.8 ml in group II (P = 0.294). Postoperative hospital stay were 5.4 ± 1.1 days in group I and 5.5 ± 1.6 days in group II (P = 0.813). The incidence of perioperative complications was not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that VAM-SLDN can be performed safely, is economically beneficial, and is comparable to VAM-HLDN in terms of postoperative outcomes.

A methodology for design and appraisal of surgical robotic systems

Surgical robotics is a growing discipline, continuously expanding with an influx of new ideas and research. However, it is important that the development of new devices take account of past mistakes and successes. A structured approach is necessary, as with proliferation of such research, there is a danger that these lessons will be obscured, resulting in the repetition of mistakes and wasted effort and energy. There are several research paths for surgical robotics, each with different risks and opportunities and different methodologies to reach a profitable outcome. The main emphasis of this paper is on a methodology for ‘applied research’ in surgical robotics. The methodology sets out a hierarchy of criteria consisting of three tiers, with the most important being the bottom tier and the least being the top tier. It is argued that a robotic system must adhere to these criteria in order to achieve acceptability. Recent commercial systems are reviewed against these criteria, and are found to conform up to at least the bottom and intermediate tiers, the most important first two tiers, and thus gain some acceptability. However, the lack of conformity to the criteria in the top tier, and the inability to conclusively prove increased clinical benefit, is shown to be hampering their potential in gaining wide establishment.

Development of a compact laparoscope manipulator (P-arm)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscope manipulating robots are useful for maintaining a stable view during a laparoscopic operation and as a substitute for the surgeon who controls the laparoscope. However, there are several problems to be solved. A large apparatus sometimes interferes with the surgeon. The setting and repositioning is awkward. Furthermore, the initial and maintenance costs are expensive. This study was designed to develop a new laparoscope manipulating robot to overcome those problems.

METHODS

We developed a compact robot applicable for various types of laparoscopic surgery with less expensive materials. The robot was evaluated by performing an in vitro laparoscopic cholecystectomy using extracted swine organs. Then, the availability of the robot to various operations was validated by performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy, anterior resection of the rectum, and distal gastrectomy using a living swine. The reliability of the system was tested by long-time continuous running.

RESULTS

A compact and lightweight laparoscope manipulating robot by the name of P-arm was developed. The surgical time of an in vitro laparoscopic cholecystectomy with and without the P-arm was not different. The three types of operations were accomplished successfully. During the entire procedure, the P-arm worked without trouble and did not interfere with the surgeons. Continuous 8-h operating tests were performed three times and neither discontinuance nor trouble occurred with the system.

CONCLUSIONS

The P-arm worked steadily for various swine operations, without interfering with surgeon's work.

Modified robotic lightweight endoscope (ViKY) validation in vivo in a porcine model

The added precision and steadiness of a robotically held camera enables the performance of more complex procedures laparoscopically. In contrast to typical laparoscope holders, the modified lightweight robotic endoscope, the ViKY system is particularly compact, simple to set up and use, and occupies no floor space. Ease and safety of setup was confirmed in a porcine model and several common general surgical procedures were performed. The sterilizable endoscope manipulator is sufficiently small to be placed directly on the operating room table without interfering with other handheld instruments during minimally invasive surgery. The endoscope manipulator and its user interface were tested and evaluated by several surgeons during a series of 5 minimally invasive surgical training procedures in a porcine model. The endoscope manipulator described has been shown to be a practical device with performance and functionality equivalent to those of commercially available models, yet with greatly reduced size, weight, and cost.