Current status of robotic assisted pelvic surgery and future developments

Training in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review of training modalities and objective and subjective assessment methods

INTRODUCTION

The variety of robotic surgery systems, training modalities, and assessment tools within robotic surgery training is extensive. This systematic review aimed to comprehensively overview different training modalities and assessment methods for teaching and assessing surgical skills in robotic surgery, with a specific focus on comparing objective and subjective assessment methods.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The electronic databases Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane were searched from inception until February 1, 2022. Included studies consisted of robotic-assisted surgery training (e.g., box training, virtual reality training, cadaver training and animal tissue training) with an assessment method (objective or subjective), such as assessment forms, virtual reality scores, peer-to-peer feedback or time recording.

RESULTS

The search identified 1591 studies. After abstract screening and full-texts examination, 209 studies were identified that focused on robotic surgery training and included an assessment tool. The majority of the studies utilized the da Vinci Surgical System, with dry lab training being the most common approach, followed by the da Vinci Surgical Skills Simulator. The most frequently used assessment methods included simulator scoring system (e.g., dVSS score), and assessment forms (e.g., GEARS and OSATS).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides an overview of training modalities and assessment methods in robotic-assisted surgery. Dry lab training on the da Vinci Surgical System and training on the da Vinci Skills Simulator are the predominant approaches. However, focused training on tissue handling, manipulation, and force interaction is lacking, despite the absence of haptic feedback. Future research should focus on developing universal objective assessment and feedback methods to address these limitations as the field continues to evolve.

Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Radical esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer is a major surgical intervention, associated with considerable postoperative morbidity. The introduction of robotic surgical platforms in esophagectomy may enhance advantages of minimally invasive surgery enabled by laparoscopy and thoracoscopy, including reduced postoperative pain and pulmonary complications. This systematic review aims to assess the clinical and oncological benefits of robot-assisted esophagectomy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane databases was performed for studies published up to 1 August 2023. This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022370983). Clinical and oncological outcomes data were extracted following full-text review of eligible studies.

RESULTS

A total of 113 studies (n = 14,701 patients, n = 2455 female) were included. The majority of the studies were retrospective in nature (n = 89, 79%), and cohort studies were the most common type of study design (n = 88, 79%). The median number of patients per study was 54. Sixty-three studies reported using a robotic surgical platform for both the abdominal and thoracic phases of the procedure. The weighted mean incidence of postoperative pneumonia was 11%, anastomotic leak 10%, total length of hospitalisation 15.2 days, and a resection margin clear of the tumour was achieved in 95% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

There are numerous reported advantages of robot-assisted surgery for resectable esophageal cancer. A correlation between procedural volume and improvements in outcomes with robotic esophagectomy has also been identified. Multicentre comparative clinical studies are essential to identify the true objective benefit on outcomes compared with conventional surgical approaches before robotic surgery is accepted as standard of practice.

Comparison of robotic right colectomy and laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For right colon surgery, there is an increasing body of literature comparing the safety of robotic right colectomy (RRC) with laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the safety and efficacy of RRC versus LRC, including homogeneous subgroup analyses for extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) and intracorporeal anastomosis (IA).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published between January 2000 and January 2022. Length of hospital stay, operation time, rate of conversion to laparotomy, time to first flatus, number of harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, rate of overall complication, ileus, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, and total costs were measured.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies (RRC: 2772 patients; LRC: 12,469 patients) were evaluated. Regardless of the type of anastomosis, RRC showed shorter length of hospital stay, lower rate of conversion to laparotomy, shorter time to first flatus, lower rate of overall complications, and a higher number of harvested lymph nodes compared with LRC, but longer operative time and higher total costs. In the IA subgroup, RRC had a shorter length of hospital stay, longer operative time, and lower rate of conversion to laparotomy compared with LRC, with no difference for the remaining outcomes. In the EA subgroup, RRC had a longer operative time, lower estimated blood loss, lower rate of overall complications, and higher total costs compared with LRC, with the other outcomes being similar.

CONCLUSION

The safety and efficacy of RRC is superior to LRC, especially when an intracorporeal anastomosis is performed. Most included articles were retrospective, offering low-quality evidence and limited conclusions.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Breast Surgery: Recent Evidence with Comparative Clinical Outcomes

In recent times, robot-assisted surgery has been prominently gaining pace to minimize overall postsurgical complications with minimal traumatization, due to technical advancements in telerobotics and ergonomics. The aim of this review is to explore the efficiency of robot-assisted systems for executing breast surgeries, including microsurgeries, direct-to-implant breast reconstruction, deep inferior epigastric perforators-based surgery, latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction, and nipple-sparing mastectomy. Robot-assisted surgery systems are efficient due to 3D-based visualization, dexterity, and range of motion while executing breast surgery. The review describes the comparative efficiency of robot-assisted surgery in relation to conventional or open surgery, in terms of clinical outcomes, morbidity rates, and overall postsurgical complication rates. Potential cost-effective barriers and technical skills were also delineated as the major limitations associated with these systems in the clinical sector. Furthermore, instrument articulation of robot-assisted surgical systems (for example, da Vinci systems) can enable high accuracy and precision surgery due to its promising ability to mitigate tremors at the time of surgery, and shortened learning curve, making it more beneficial than other open surgery procedures.

Case Sequence Analysis of the Robotic Colorectal Resection Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer offers many potential benefits, but as with any new technology, there is a learning curve.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify trends in the uptake of robotic resection and associated complication rates.

DESIGN

This was a case sequence analysis of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperation System database.

PATIENTS

Adults undergoing colorectal resection for cancer from 2008 through 2016 were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative database. Case sequence analysis was used to describe surgeon experience, with cases grouped into quartiles based on the chronological order in which each surgeon performed them.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes included in-hospital major events (myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, shock, and death) and iatrogenic complications. Generalized linear mixed models were used to estimate the relationship between case sequence and operative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2763 robotic procedures were included, with volume increasing from 76 cases in 2010 to 702 cases in 2015. The proportion of cases performed by surgeons earliest in their learning curve has increased to 18.2% in 2015. This quartile was composed of more black patients (11.4% earliest quartile vs 7.0% latest quartile; p < 0.001) and rectal resections (50.1% earliest quartile vs 38.9% latest quartile; p < 0.001). In adjusted analysis, major complications did not improve with increasing case sequence. However, with increasing cumulative surgeon case sequence iatrogenic complications were reduced, particularly in the highest volume quartile (OR = 0.29 (95% CI, 0.09-0.88); p = 0.03). Odds of prolonged length of stay (>75 percentile) were also decreased (OR = 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37-0.69); p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Data were derived from an administrative database.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic colorectal resection has been rapidly adopted. Surgeons earliest in their experience have increased iatrogenic complications and continue to make up a large proportion of cases performed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A974. ANÁLISIS DE SECUENCIA DE CASOS DE LA CURVA DE APRENDIZAJE DE RESECCIÓN ROBÓTICA COLORRECTAL: La cirugía robótica para el cáncer colorrectal ofrece muchos beneficios potenciales, pero como con cualquier nueva tecnología, presenta una importante curva de aprendizaje.

OBJETIVO

Se buscó identificar tendencias en la aceptación de la resección robótica y las tasas de complicaciones asociadas. DISEÑO:: Análisis de secuencia de casos de cirugía robótica para cáncer colorrectal AJUSTES:: Base de datos del Sistema de Cooperación para la Investigación y la Planificación del Estado de Nueva York.

PACIENTES

Los adultos que se sometieron a una resección colorrectal en caso de cáncer desde 2008 hasta 2016 se identificaron en la base de datos de la Cooperativa de Investigación y Planificación del Estado de Nueva York. Se utilizó un análisis de secuencia de casos para describir la experiencia del cirujano, y los casos se agruparon en cuartiles según el orden cronológico en el que cada cirujano los operó.

RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES

Los resultados incluyeron los eventos intrahospitalarios mayores (infarto de miocardio, embolia pulmonar, shock y muerte) y las complicaciones iatrogénicas. Se utilizaron modelos lineales generalizados mixtos para estimar la relación entre la secuencia de casos y los resultados operativos.

RESULTADOS

Se incluyeron un total de 2.763 procedimientos robóticos, con un aumento del volumen de 76 casos en 2010 a 702 casos en 2015. La proporción de casos realizados por cirujanos en su primera curva de aprendizaje aumentó a 18.2% en 2015. Este cuartil estaba compuesto por una mayoría de pacientes de color (11.4% en el cuartil más temprano versus 7.0% en el último cuartil, p < 0.001) y de resecciones rectales (50.1% en el primer cuartil vs 38.9% en el último cuartil, p < 0.001). En el ajuste del análisis, las complicaciones mayores no mejoraron al aumentar la secuencia de casos. Sin embargo, al aumentar la secuencia acumulada de casos de cirujanos, se redujeron las complicaciones iatrogénicas, particularmente en el cuartil de mayor volumen (OR = 0,29; IC del 95%: 0,09 a 0,88; p = 0,03). Las probabilidades de una estadía hospitalaria prolongada (> percentil 75) también disminuyeron (OR 0,50; IC del 95%: 0,37 a 0,69; p < 0,001).

LIMITACIONES

Los valores fueron derivados desde una base de datos administrativa.

CONCLUSIONES

La resección colorrectal robótica ha sido adoptada rápidamente. Los cirujanos durante su experiencia inicial han presentado un elevado número de complicaciones iatrogénicas y éstas representan todavía, una gran proporción de casos realizados. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A974.

Robotic resection of recurrent pediatric lipoblastoma

This case demonstrates successful resection of a rare, recurrent presacral-pelvic lipoblastoma in a 19-year-old female patient. Because of the anatomical location of the mass and its proximity to vital structures, the robotic approach allowed for both optimal visualization and effective debulking of the mass. Furthermore, with the use of an articulating laparoscopic camera, key visualization of the posterior lateral pelvis was possible. Using a wide breadth of technologies and resources is essential to broadening the surgical armamentarium and achieving resectability in otherwise challenging cases.

Right hemicolectomy: a network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic-assisted, total laparoscopic, and robotic approach

BACKGROUND

There are a variety of surgical approaches for the management of right-sided colonic neoplasms. To date, no method has been shown superior in terms of surgical and perioperative outcomes. This meta-analysis compared open (ORH), laparoscopic-assisted (LRH), total laparoscopic (TLRH), and robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) to assess surgical outcomes and perioperative morbidity and mortality.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted an electronic systematic search using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science that compared RRH, TLRH, LRH, and ORH. Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria: 5 randomized controlled trials, 25 retrospective, and 18 prospective studies totalling 5652 patients were included.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate was similar between RRH and TLRH (RR 1.0; Crl 0.66-1.5). The anastomotic leak rate was higher in LRH and ORH compared to RRH (RR 1.9; Crl 0.99-3.6 and RR 1.2; Crl 0.55-2.6, respectively), whereas it was lower in TLRH compared to RRH (RR 0.88 Crl 0.41-1.9). The risk of reoperation was significantly higher in ORH compared to TLRH (RR 3.3; Crl 1.3-8.0). Operative time was similar in RRH compared to LRH (RR - 27.0; Crl - 61.0 to 5.9), and to TLRH (RR - 24.0; Crl - 70.0 to 21.0). The hospital stay was significantly longer in LRH compared to RRH (RR 3.7; Crl 0.7-6.7).

CONCLUSION

The surgical management of right-sided colonic disease is evolving. This network meta-analysis observed that short-term outcomes following RRH and TLRH were superior to standard LRH and ORH. The adoption of more advanced minimally invasive techniques can be costly and have associated learning phases, but will ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Envisioning robotic surgery: Surgeons' needs and views on interacting with future technologies and interfaces

BACKGROUND

The development of technology in robotic surgery is typically presented from a technical perspective. This study considers the user perspective as an input to the development of technology by exploring potential solutions within and beyond the field of robotic surgery.

METHODS

Advanced technological solution concepts were selected based on a technology review and an ethnographic study. Using a future workshop method, these were rated and discussed by a group of surgeons from three perspectives: enhancing operation outcome, user experience and learning in the operating theatre.

RESULTS

Diverse technologies were considered to offer potential for supporting the surgeons' work. User experience and learning could be improved especially via solutions novel to robotic surgery. Robotic surgery technologies currently under development were mainly considered to support a good operation outcome. Suitability for practical work was elaborated upon, and related concerns were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The results can support development of robotic surgery to enhance surgeons' work.

Comparison of outcome and cost among open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgical treatments for rectal cancer: A propensity score matched analysis of nationwide inpatient sample data

BACKGROUND

Population-based studies evaluating outcomes of different approaches for rectal cancer are scarce.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database between 2008 and 2012. We compared the outcomes and costs among rectal cancer patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, or open surgeries using propensity scores for adjusted and matched analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 194 957 rectal cancer patients. Over the 5-year period, the annual admission number decreased by 13.9%, the in-hospital mortality rate decreased by 32.2%, while the total hospitalization cost increased by 13.6%. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery had significantly lower length of stay (LOS) (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.57-0.84), comparable wound complications (OR 1.08, 95%CI 0.70-1.65) and higher cost (OR 1.42, 95%CI 1.13-1.79), while open surgery had significantly longer LOS (OR 1.38, 95%CI 1.19-1.59), more wound complications (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.08-1.79), and comparable cost (OR 0.92, 95%CI 0.79-1.07). There were no difference in in-hospital mortality among three approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery was associated with better outcomes than open surgery. Robotic surgery was associated with higher cost, but no advantage over laparoscopic surgery in terms of mortality and complications. Studies on cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery may be warranted.

Novel surgical techniques, regenerative medicine, tissue engineering and innovative immunosuppression in kidney transplantation

On the 60th anniversary of the first successfully performed renal transplantation, we summarize the historical, current and potential future status of kidney transplantation. We discuss three different aspects with a potential significant influence on kidney transplantation progress: the development of surgical techniques, the influence of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering, and changes in immunosuppression. We evaluate the standard open surgical procedures with modern techniques and compare them to less invasive videoscopic as well as robotic techniques. The role of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine as a potential method for future kidney regeneration or replacement and the interesting search for novel solutions in the field of immunosuppression will be discussed. After 60 years since the first successfully performed kidney transplantation, we can conclude that the greatest achievements are associated with the development of surgical techniques and with planned systemic immunosuppression.

Surgeons' physical discomfort and symptoms during robotic surgery: a comprehensive ergonomic survey study

BACKGROUND

It is commonly believed that robotic surgery systems provide surgeons with an ergonomically sound work environment; however, the actual experience of surgeons practicing robotic surgery (RS) has not been thoroughly researched. In this ergonomics survey study, we investigated surgeons' physical symptom reports and their association with factors including demographics, specialties, and robotic systems.

METHODS

Four hundred and thirty-two surgeons regularly practicing RS completed this comprehensive survey comprising 20 questions in four categories: demographics, systems, ergonomics, and physical symptoms. Chi-square and multinomial logistic regression analyses were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-six surgeons (56.1 %) reported physical symptoms or discomfort. Among those symptoms, neck stiffness, finger, and eye fatigues were the most common. With the newest robot, eye symptom rate was considerably reduced, while neck and finger symptoms did not improve significantly. A high rate of lower back stiffness was correlated with higher annual robotic case volume, and eye symptoms were more common with longer years practicing robotic surgery (p < 0.05). The symptom report rate from urology surgeons was significantly higher than other specialties (p < 0.05). Noticeably, surgeons with higher confidence and helpfulness levels with their ergonomic settings reported lower symptom report rates. Symptoms were not correlated with age and gender.

CONCLUSION

Although RS provides relatively better ergonomics, this study demonstrates that 56.1 % of regularly practicing robotic surgeons still experience related physical symptoms or discomfort. In addition to system improvement, surgeon education in optimizing the ergonomic settings may be necessary to maximize the ergonomic benefits in RS.

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted colectomy and rectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Lately, the main technical innovations in the field of colorectal surgery have been the introduction of laparoscopic and robotic techniques; the aim of this study is to investigate the results and the advantages of these two surgical approaches.

METHODS

Twenty-two studies including 1652 laparoscopic and 1120 robotic-assisted resections were analyzed and categorized into right, left, and pelvic resections of the middle/low rectum, aiming to the following outcomes: operating time, blood loss, bowel function recovery, return to oral intake, morbidity, hospital stay, and costs.

RESULTS

The vast majority of the studies were non-randomized investigations (19/22 studies) enrolling small cohorts of patients (median 55.0 laparoscopic and 34.5 robotic-assisted group) with a mean age of 62.2-61.0 years. Funnel plot analysis documented heterogeneity in studies which combined cancers and benign diseases. Our meta-analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favor of laparoscopic procedures regarding costs and operating time (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.686 and 0.493) and in favor of robotic surgery concerning morbidity rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.763), although no benefits were documented when analyzing exclusively randomized trials. When we differentiated approaches by side of resections, a significant difference was found in favor of the laparoscopic group when analyzing operating time in left-sided and pelvic procedures (SMD 0.609 and 0.529) and blood loss in pelvic resections (SMD 0.339).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic techniques were documented as the shorter procedures, which provided lower blood loss in pelvic resections, while morbidity rate was more favorable in robotic surgery. However, these results could not be confirmed when we focused the analysis on randomized trials only.

Emerging and Evolving Technology in Colon and Rectal Surgery

Minimally invasive surgery has changed the way we manage many colon and rectal pathologies. Multiple techniques, from straight laparoscopic procedures, to hand-assisted and single-port techniques are available, requiring surgeons to go through various learning curves. Robotic surgery is a relatively novel technique in general surgery which appears to hold most promise for rectal resection. Laparoscopic rectal procedures are difficult, and even in experienced hands, conversion rates are around 17%. Robotic surgery may be a point of difference in these cases, despite a long learning curve and higher costs. This article will describe the role of robotics in colorectal surgery. Room set up, port placement, and docking strategies will be described for common procedures, with emphasis on a hybrid robotic low anterior resection.

SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA)

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci(®) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is a computer-assisted (robotic) surgical system designed to enable and enhance minimally invasive surgery. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared computer-assisted surgical systems for use by trained physicians in an operating room environment for laparoscopic surgical procedures in general, cardiac, colorectal, gynecologic, head and neck, thoracic and urologic surgical procedures. There are substantial numbers of peer-reviewed papers regarding the da Vinci(®) Surgical System, and a thoughtful assessment of evidence framed by clinical opinion is warranted.

METHODS

The SAGES da Vinci(®) TAVAC sub-committee performed a literature review of the da Vinci(®) Surgical System regarding gastrointestinal surgery. Conclusions by the sub-committee were vetted by the SAGES TAVAC Committee and SAGES Executive Board. Following revisions, the document was evaluated by the TAVAC Committee and Executive Board again for final approval.

RESULTS

Several conclusions were drawn based on expert opinion organized by safety, efficacy, and cost for robotic foregut, bariatric, hepatobiliary/pancreatic, colorectal surgery, and single-incision cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal surgery with the da Vinci(®) Surgical System is safe and comparable, but not superior to standard laparoscopic approaches. Although clinically acceptable, its use may be costly for select gastrointestinal procedures. Current data are limited to the da Vinci(®) Surgical System; further analyses are needed.

Abdominal Hysterectomy: Reduced Risk of Surgical Site Infection Associated with Robotic and Laparoscopic Technique

BACKGROUND

Hysterectomy is one of the most common procedures performed in the United States. New techniques utilizing laparoscopic and robotic technology are becoming increasingly common. It is unknown if these minimally invasive surgical techniques alter the risk of surgical site infections (SSI).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy at our institution between January 2011 and June 2013. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth edition (ICD-9) codes and chart review were used to identify patients undergoing hysterectomy by open, laparoscopic, or robotic approach and to identify patients who developed SSI subsequently. Chi-square and analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to identify univariate risk factors and logistic regression was used to perform multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

During this time period, 986 patients were identified who had undergone abdominal hysterectomy, with 433 receiving open technique (44%), 116 laparoscopic (12%), 407 robotic (41%), and 30 cases that were converted from minimally invasive to open (3%). Patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy were significantly younger and had lower body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores than those undergoing open or robotic hysterectomy. There were no significant differences between patients undergoing open versus robotic hysterectomy. The post-operative hospital stay was significantly longer for open procedures compared with those using laparoscopic or robotic techniques (5.1, 1.7, and 1.6 d, respectively; p<0.0001). The overall rate of SSI after all hysterectomy procedures was 4.2%. More SSI occurred in open cases (6.5%) than laparoscopic (0%) or robotic (2.2%) (p<0.0001). Cases converted to open also had an increased rate of SSI (13.3%). In both univariate and multivariable analyses, open technique, wound class of III/IV, age greater than 75 y, and morbid obesity were all associated with increased risk of SSI.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies were associated with a significantly lower risk of SSI and shorter hospital stays. Body mass index, advanced age, and wound class were also independent risk factors for SSI.

Surgical advances in bladder cancer: at what cost?

Bladder cancer is the most expensive cancer to treat from diagnosis to death. Frequent disease recurrence, intense follow-up, and expensive, invasive techniques for diagnosis and treatment drive these costs for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Fluorescence cystoscopy increases the detection of superficial bladder cancer and reduces costs by improving the quality of resection and reducing recurrences. Radical cystectomy with intestinal diversion is the mainstay of treatment of invasive disease; however it is associated with substantial cost and morbidity. Increased efforts to improve the surgical management of bladder cancer while reducing the cost of treatment are increasingly necessary.

Implementation of a robotic surgical program in gynaecological oncology and comparison with prior laparoscopic series

Background. Robotic surgery in gynaecological oncology is a rapidly developing field as it offers several technical advantages over conventional laparoscopy. An audit was performed on the outcome of robotic surgery during our learning curve and compared with recent well-established laparoscopic procedure data. Method. Following acquisition of the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, California, USA), we prospectively analysed all cases performed over the first six months by one experienced gynaecologist who had been appropriately trained and mentored. Data on age, BMI, pathology, surgery type, blood loss, morbidity, return to theatre, hospital stay, and readmission rate were collected and compared with a consecutive series over the preceding 6 months performed laparoscopically by the same team. Results. A comparison of two consecutive series was made. The mean age was somewhat different, 55 years in the robotic versus 69 years in the laparoscopic group, but obesity was a feature of both groups with a mean of BMI 29.3 versus 28.06, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.54). Three subgroups of minimal access surgical procedures were performed: total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingooophorectomy (TH + BSO), total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingooophorectomy plus bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy (TH + BSO + BPLND), and radical hysterectomy plus bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy (RH + BPLND). The mean time taken to perform surgery for TH + BSO was longer in the robotic group, 151.2 min compared to 126.3 min in the laparoscopic group. TH + BSO + BPLND surgical time was similar to 178.3 min in robotic group and 176.5 min in laparoscopic group. RH + BPLND surgical time was similar, 263.6 min (robotic arm) and 264.0 min (laparoscopic arm). However, the numbers in this initial analysis were small especially in the last two subgroups and do not allow for statistical analysis. The rate of complications necessitating intervention (Clavien-Dindo classification grade 2/3) was higher in the robotic arm (22.7%) compared to the laparoscopic approach (4.5%). The readmission rate was higher in the robotic group (18.2%) compared to the laparoscopic group (4.5%). The return to theatre in the robotic group was 18.2% and 4.5% in laparoscopic group. Uncomplicated robotic surgery hospital stay appeared to be shorter, 1.3 days compared to the uncomplicated laparoscopic group, 2.5 days. There was no conversion to the open procedure in either arm. Estimated blood loss in all cases was less than 100 mL in both groups. Conclusion. Robotic surgery is comparable to laparoscopic surgery in blood loss; however, the hospital stay in uncomplicated cases appears to be longer in the laparoscopic arm. Surgical robotic time is equivalent to laparoscopic in complex cases but may be longer in cases not requiring lymph node dissection. The robotic surgery team learning curve may be associated with higher rate of morbidity. Further research on the benefits to the surgeon is needed to clarify the whole picture of this versatile novel surgical approach.

Control devices and steering strategies in pathway surgery

For pathway surgery, that is, minimally invasive procedures carried out transluminally or through instrument-created pathways, handheld maneuverable instruments are being developed. As the accompanying control interfaces of such instruments have not been optimized for intuitive manipulation, we investigated the effect of control mode (1DoF or 2DoF), and control device (joystick or handgrip) on human performance in a navigation task. The experiments were conducted using the Endo-PaC (Endoscopic-Path Controller), a simulator that emulates the shaft and handle of a maneuverable instrument, combined with custom-developed software animating pathway surgical scenarios. Participants were asked to guide a virtual instrument without collisions toward a target located at the end of a virtual curved tunnel. The performance was assessed in terms of task completion time, path length traveled by the virtual instrument, motion smoothness, collision metrics, subjective workload, and personal preference. The results indicate that 2DoF control leads to faster task completion and fewer collisions with the tunnel wall combined with a strong subjective preference compared with 1DoF control. Handgrip control appeared to be more intuitive to master than joystick control. However, the participants experienced greater physical demand and had longer path lengths with handgrip than joystick control.

Trainee performance at robotic console and benchmark operative times

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

It is an ongoing challenge to maintain surgical efficiency while integrating trainee participation. We hypothesize that a program of graduated surgical responsibility for trainees does not hinder operative efficiency.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of trainee performance times, collected prospectively in real time, for robotic cases performed at one university hospital between September 2008 and August 2011. The primary aim was to compare overall operative times between cases performed by trainees versus attendings. Secondary aims were to compare operative times for major portions of each operation by level of training and to establish benchmark operative times for trainees.

RESULTS

During the study period, 98 cases had recorded trainee performance times. Total robot docked time was longer for trainees than for attendings (155 vs 132 min, p = 0.011), but mean performance times for hysterectomy (70 vs 59 min, p = 0.096) and sacrocolpopexy (76 vs 79 min, p = 0.545) were similar. Within the trainees, there was no correlation between surgical time and rank for each step of the procedures. Utilizing mean performance times for all trainees, benchmark operative times were established for each step of hysterectomy in minutes: right side (21), left side (21), bladder flap (10), colpotomy (15), and cuff closure (19); similarly, for sacrocolpopexy: sacral and peritoneal dissection (12), anterior cuff dissection (10), posterior cuff dissection (8), anterior mesh attachment (15), posterior mesh attachment (18), sacral mesh attachment (12), and peritoneal closure (9).

CONCLUSION

In a program of graduated surgical responsibility, robotic operative efficiency was comparable when trainees were involved as console surgeons.

Ureteric injury: a challenging condition to diagnose and manage

Although ureteric injury is relatively uncommon, it is a serious event that can result in intra-abdominal sepsis, renal failure, and loss of the ipsilateral renal unit. Most injuries are iatrogenic and remain undiagnosed until the patient presents with symptoms postoperatively. In addition to compromising patient safety, missed ureteric injuries frequently result in litigation. Over the past 20 years, there has been a rapid uptake of laparoscopic and robotic techniques within urology and other surgical specialties. This trend, coupled with increased use of ureteroscopy, has increased the risk of injury to the ureter. The key to diagnosing and managing a ureteric injury is to have a low threshold for suspecting its presence. Diagnosis can be achieved using retrograde pyelography, ureteroscopy, CT, or intravenous urography. Initial management should involve ureteric stent placement or percutaneous nephrostomy drainage. In selected patients, surgical reconstruction might be the optimal approach. Decisions regarding surgical technique (open, laparoscopic, or robotic) are guided by the clinical situation and surgical expertise available.

Review of manual control methods for handheld maneuverable instruments

By the introduction of new technologies, surgical procedures have been varying from free access in open surgery towards limited access in minimal access surgery. Improving access to difficult-to-reach anatomic sites, e.g. in neurosurgery or percutaneous interventions, needs advanced maneuverable instrumentation. Advances in maneuverable technology require the development of dedicated methods enabling surgeons to stay in direct, manual control of these complex instruments. This article gives an overview of the state-of-the-art in the development of manual control methods for handheld maneuverable instruments. It categorizes the manual control methods in three levels: a) number of steerable segments, b) number of Degrees Of Freedom (DOF), and c) coupling between control motion of the handle and steering motion of the tip. The literature research was completed by using Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed. The study shows that in controlling single steerable segments, direct as well as indirect control methods have been developed, whereas in controlling multiple steerable segments, a gradual shift can be noticed from parallel and serial control to integrated control. The development of multi-segmented maneuverable instruments is still at an early stage, and an intuitive and effective method to control them has to become a primary focus in the domain of minimal access surgery.

Current status of validation for robotic surgery simulators - a systematic review

To analyse studies validating the effectiveness of robotic surgery simulators. The MEDLINE(®), EMBASE(®) and PsycINFO(®) databases were systematically searched until September 2011. References from retrieved articles were reviewed to broaden the search. The simulator name, training tasks, participant level, training duration and evaluation scoring were extracted from each study. We also extracted data on feasibility, validity, cost-effectiveness, reliability and educational impact. We identified 19 studies investigating simulation options in robotic surgery. There are five different robotic surgery simulation platforms available on the market. In all, 11 studies sought opinion and compared performance between two different groups; 'expert' and 'novice'. Experts ranged in experience from 21-2200 robotic cases. The novice groups consisted of participants with no prior experience on a robotic platform and were often medical students or junior doctors. The Mimic dV-Trainer(®), ProMIS(®), SimSurgery Educational Platform(®) (SEP) and Intuitive systems have shown face, content and construct validity. The Robotic Surgical SimulatorTM system has only been face and content validated. All of the simulators except SEP have shown educational impact. Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of simulation systems was not evaluated in any trial. Virtual reality simulators were shown to be effective training tools for junior trainees. Simulation training holds the greatest potential to be used as an adjunct to traditional training methods to equip the next generation of robotic surgeons with the skills required to operate safely. However, current simulation models have only been validated in small studies. There is no evidence to suggest one type of simulator provides more effective training than any other. More research is needed to validate simulated environments further and investigate the effectiveness of animal and cadaveric training in robotic surgery.

Comparison of Two Control Methods for Minimally Invasive Surgical Instruments

Laparoscopic surgery is performed with long and slender instruments through one or several incisions in the abdominal wall. Steerable instruments with flexible distal tips have been developed for improving the ease of access to anatomic structures. However, the development of an intuitive and efficient control method for such steerable instruments remains a challenge. To determine which interface are most intuitive and effective to control steerable instruments, the current study evaluates the performance of novices in orienting the tip of a steerable laparoscopic forceps using thumb control or wrist control. Using two steerable instruments, one controlled by the thumb and the other by the wrist, 24 novices were divided into two groups that had to carry out an experimental task in an EndoTrainer with one of the two instruments. The participants had to orient the tip of the instrument relative to five targets that were presented in a random order. After a break, the participants switched to a second measurement session with the other instrument, followed by a third measurement session with the first instrument. Each participant performed the task 240 times over the three measurement sessions. The performance was assessed by measuring the performance time, using a questionnaire and grading the work load. The performance time showed a significant learning curve for each control method. The shortest performance time was recorded during the third session with both control methods (42.7 s for thumb control and 44.6 s for wrist control). A significant difference in the performance time was observed in the second session (p <0.02) but not in the first and third session. The questionnaire showed that most participants had a preference for thumb control. After a brief training period, thumb control and wrist control did not reveal significant differences in task performance. However, thumb control was strongly preferred by the participants due to the perceptive feeling in performance.

Assessing the cost effectiveness of robotics in urological surgery - a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Although robotic technology is becoming increasingly popular for urological procedures, barriers to its widespread dissemination include cost and the lack of long term outcomes. This systematic review analyzed studies comparing the use of robotic with laparoscopic and open urological surgery. These three procedures were assessed for cost efficiency in the form of direct as well as indirect costs that could arise from length of surgery, hospital stay, complications, learning curve and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed searching Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases. Two reviewers identified abstracts using online databases and independently reviewed full length papers suitable for inclusion in the study.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy are superior with respect to reduced hospital stay (range 1-1.76 days and 1-5.5 days, respectively) and blood loss (range 482-780 mL and 227-234 mL, respectively) when compared with the open approach (range 2-8 days and 1015 mL). Robot assisted radical prostatectomy remains more expensive (total cost ranging from US $2000-$39,215) than both laparoscopic (range US $740-$29,771) and open radical prostatectomy (range US $1870-$31,518). This difference is due to the cost of robot purchase, maintenance and instruments. The reduced length of stay in hospital (range 1-1.5 days) and length of surgery (range 102-360 min) are unable to compensate for the excess costs. Robotic surgery may require a smaller learning curve (20-40 cases) although the evidence is inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery provides similar postoperative outcomes to laparoscopic surgery but a reduced learning curve. Although costs are currently high, increased competition from manufacturers and wider dissemination of the technology could drive down costs. Further trials are needed to evaluate long term outcomes in order to evaluate fully the value of all three procedures in urological surgery.

Robotic assistance may reduce conversion to open in rectal carcinoma laparoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that robotic assistance (RARS) could provide better intraoperative and short-term outcomes than a traditional laparoscopic approach (LARS) to rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature, including electronic searches and communications to international robotic meetings.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

studies involving rectal cancer patients and comparing outcomes of robotic surgery vs laparoscopic surgery. Primary end-points: conversion and postoperative short-term complications. Meta-analysis performed using Review Manager 5.0 software.

RESULTS

Five case-control studies involving 486 patients (203 RARS-283 LARS) were finally included. Conversion to open rate (RR = 0.31; 95% CI 0.12,0.78) was lower for RARS. No differences were found in oncological outcomes, hospital stay or anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of available non-randomized studies suggests that conversion to open rate may be reduced when using RARS instead of LARS for rectal cancer.

Robotic-assisted proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched comparison of laparoscopic and robotic technique

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic proctectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

This is an IRB-approved case-matched review. Seventeen robotic proctectomies (RP), 10 with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and 7 completion (CP), were matched to laparoscopic proctectomies (LP). Short-term and functional outcomes were compared between LP and RP.

RESULTS

In CP cohort, operative times were longer in the RP group (351 RP vs 238 LP min, p = 0.03), mean robotic time 90 min. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar between RP-CP and LP-CP groups (p = 0.18). Return of bowel function (RBF) was slower in RP-CP group (3.0 vs 1.7 days, p = 0.04), and length of stay (LOS) was longer (6.4 vs 4.1 days, p = 0.02). In the IPAA group, there were no differences between operative times (p = 0.14), robotic time 86 min; EBL (p = 0.15), and postoperative complications. Return of bowel function (3.6 vs 2.6 days, p = 0.3) and LOS (8.5 vs 6.1 days, p = 0.17) were similar between RP and LP. Bowel and sexual function were equivalent between LP and RP-IPAA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic proctectomy is a safe and effective technique for patients with IBD. It is comparable to LP with regard to perioperative outcomes, complications, and short-term functional results.

Assessment of joystick and wrist control in hand-held articulated laparoscopic prototypes

BACKGROUND

Various steerable instruments with flexible distal tip have been developed for laparoscopic surgery. The problem of steering such instruments, however, remains a challenge, because no study investigated which control method is the most suitable. This study was designed to examine whether thumb (joystick) or wrist control method is designated for prototypes of steerable instruments by means of motion analysis.

METHODS

Five experts and 12 novices participated. Each participant performed a needle-driving task in three directions (right → left, up → down, and down → up) with two prototypes (wrist and thumb) and a conventional instrument. Novices performed the tasks in three sessions, whereas experts performed one session only. The order of performing the tasks was determined by Latin squares design. Assessment of performance was done by means of five motion analysis parameters, a newly developed matrix for assigning penalty points, and a questionnaire.

RESULTS

The thumb-controlled prototype outperformed the wrist-controlled prototype. Comparison of the results obtained in each task showed that regarding penalty points, the up → down task was the most difficult to perform.

CONCLUSIONS

The thumb control is more suitable for steerable instruments than the wrist control. To avoid uncontrolled movements and difficulties with applying forces to the tissue while keeping the tip of the instrument at the constant angle, adding a "locking" feature is necessary. It is advisable not to perform the needle driving task in the up → down direction.

Training and learning robotic surgery, time for a more structured approach: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery is growing rapidly and there is an increasing need for a structured approach to train future robotic surgeons.

OBJECTIVES

To review the literature on training and learning strategies for robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the Journal of Robotic Surgery was performed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included articles concerning training, learning, education and teaching of robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery in any specialism.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected articles to be included. We categorised the included articles into: training modalities, learning curve, training future surgeons, curriculum design and implementation.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 114 full text articles. Training modalities such as didactic training, skills training (dry lab, virtual reality, animal or cadaver models), case observation, bedside assisting, proctoring and the mentoring console can be used for training in robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery. Several training programmes in general and specific programmes designed for residents, fellows and surgeons are described in the literature. We provide guidelines for development of a structured training programme.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgical training consists of system training and procedural training. System training should be formally organised and should be competence based, instead of time based. Virtual reality training will play an import role in the near future. Procedural training should be organised in a stepwise approach with objective assessment of each step. This review aims to facilitate and improve the implementation of structured robotic surgical training programmes.

Robotic vs. laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in morbidly obese patients: systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to provide pooled analysis of individually small trials comparing robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) with standard laparoscopic RYGB (LRYGB).

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases was performed. Primary outcome measures were the incidence of anastomotic leak and stricture. Secondary outcome measures were post-operative complications, operative time and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Seven relevant studies of 1686 patients were included in this analysis. There was a significantly reduced incidence of anastomotic stricture in the robotic group (POR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.98; p = 0.04). There was no significant difference between robotic and laparoscopic groups for anastomotic leak, post-operative complications, operative time and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of anastomotic stricture was reduced with RRYGB compared with LRYGB over a minimum follow-up period of 6 months, thus demonstrating the potential benefit of RRYGB.

The current landscape of locally advanced rectal cancer

Postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was recommended as the standard treatment for patients with rectal cancer because it reduces local recurrence. This paradigm shifted with the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which not only reduces local recurrence but also improves sphincter preservation and surgical outcomes. However, the treatment of rectal carcinoma remains complicated. The accuracy of tumor staging can be compromised depending on the imaging modality used. The addition of modern chemotherapeutics and biologics to 5-fluorouracil as radiation sensitizers is questionable. Oxaliplatin as a radiation sensitizer has minimal effects on the pathologic complete response, but improves the radiographical response at the expense of an increased risk of toxicities. The role of biologics in addition to radiation therapy continues to be explored. Attention has focused on improving diagnostic imaging, radiation oncology, and surgical techniques, treatment regimens, and on exploring a role of molecular markers for patients with rectal cancers. We review the pivotal trials that have led to the current treatment paradigm for locally advanced rectal cancer and discuss novel methodologies that are being developed for the treatment of this prevalent malignancy.

Postoperative care for the robotic surgery bowel resection patient

A new surgical method is available for colon and rectal surgery. Robotic surgery, using the daVinci Si HD Surgical System, offers surgical advances compared with the traditional open or laparoscopic surgical methods. The potential advantages of robotic technology continue to be explored and its most appropriate functions are yet to be determined. In clinical experience, the use of this surgical method has resulted in changes to postoperative nursing care management. This article describes changes in the management of postoperative patient care including fluid and electrolyte balance, and patient and staff education. Modifications were instituted in the clinical pathway to facilitate an accelerated standard of care. New discharge strategies were implemented to ensure ongoing fluid and electrolyte balance by the patient. A true team effort from a multitude of disciplines was required for the changes in patient care routine to be effective. Outcomes including length of stay and patient satisfaction are presented.

Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of the da Vinci S HD robotic system in mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma, with the aim to identify areas of potential advantage for the robot in this procedure.

METHODS

This study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of 44 consecutive cases of robot-assisted mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma performed between August 2005 and February 2010. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and complications were evaluated and compared with similar published reports and relevant literature.

RESULTS

There were 28 (63.6%) men and 16 (36.4%) women, with a mean age of 63 years. The majority of patients were either overweight or obese and 88.7% of lesions were in the mid or low rectum. We performed 36 low anterior resections (6 intersphincteric) and 8 abdominoperineal resections with a median blood loss of 150 mL (range, 50-1000), a median operative time of 347 minutes (range, 155-510), and a median length of stay of 5 days (range, 3-36). The median lymph node yield was 14 (range, 5-45) and the circumferential resection margin was negative in all patients. We had 1 distal margin positivity (2.7%), 2 anastomotic leaks (5.6%), 1 death (2.7%), and 2 conversions (4.5%) to the open approach. No robot-associated morbidity occurred in this series.

CONCLUSIONS

This series compares favorably with similar published reports with regard to the safety and feasibility of robotic assistance in total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. The lower conversion rates reported for robotic rectal resection compared with laparoscopy require validation in large randomized trials.