Clinical applications of Telerobotic ENT-Head and Neck surgery

Foot-Controlled Robot-Enabled EnDOscope Manipulator (FREEDOM) for Sinus Surgery: Design, Control, and Evaluation

Despite successful clinical applications, teleoperated robotic surgical systems face particular limitations in the functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) in terms of incompatible instrument dimensions and robot set-up. The endoscope remains manually handled by an assistant when the surgeon performs bimanual operations. This paper introduces the development of the Foot-controlled Robot-Enabled EnDOscope Manipulator (FREEDOM) designed for FESS. The system features clinical considerations that inform the design for providing reliable and safe endoscope positioning with minimal obstruction to the routine practice. The robot structure is modular and compact to ensure coaxial instrument manipulation through the nostril for manual procedures. To avoid rigid endoscope motions, a new compliant endoscope holder is proposed that passively limits the lens-tissue contact forces under collisions for patient-side protection. To facilitate hands-free endoscope manipulation that imposes minimal distractions to the surgeon, a foot-wearable interface is further designed to relieve the assistant's workload. The foot control method owns a short learning curve (mean 3.4 mins), and leads the task to be more ergonomic and surgeon-centered. Cadaver and clinical studies were both conducted to evaluate the surgical applicability of the FREEDOM to assist endoscope manipulation in FESS. The system was validated to be safe (IEC-60601-1) and easy for set up (mean 3.6 mins), from which the surgeon could perform various three-handed procedures alone in FESS without disrupting the routine practice.

Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic operation in anus-preserving rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Objective

The aim of this meta-analysis is to provide recommendations for clinical practice and prevention of postoperative complications, such as circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement, and compare the amount of intraoperative bleeding, safety, operative time, recovery, outcomes, and clinical significance of robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic procedures in anus-preserving rectal cancer.

Methods

A literature search (PubMed) was performed to identify biomedical research papers and abstracts of studies comparing robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic procedures. We attempted to obtain the full-text link for papers published between 2000 and 2016, and hand-searched references for relevant literature. RevMan 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.

Results

Nine papers (949 patients) were eligible for inclusion; there were 473 patients (49.8%) in the robotic group and 476 patients (50.2%) in the laparoscopic group. According to the data provided in the literature, seven indicators were used to complete the evaluation. The results of the meta-analysis suggested that robot-assisted procedure was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss (mean difference [MD] −41.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] −77.51, −4.79; P=0.03), lower open conversion rate (risk difference [RD] −0.05; 95% CI −0.09, −0.01; P=0.02), lower hospital stay (MD −1.07; 95% CI −1.80, −0.33; P=0.005), lower overall complication rate (odds ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.41, 0.83; P=0.003), and longer operative time (MD 33.73; 95% CI 8.48, 58.99; P=0.009) compared with conventional laparoscopy. There were no differences in the rate of CRM involvement (RD −0.02; 95% CI −0.05, 0.01; P=0.23) and days to return of bowel function (MD −0.03; 95% CI −0.40, 0.34; P=0.89).

Conclusion

The Da Vinci robot was superior to laparoscopy with respect to blood loss, open conversion, hospital stay, and postoperative complications during anus-preserving rectal cancer procedures; however, conventional laparoscopy had an advantage regarding operative time. The remaining indicators (CRMs and recovery from intestinal peristalsis) did not differ.

Robotic endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery: review of the literature and future prospects

OBJECTIVE

There has been a considerable growth in the indications of endonasal surgery that now include malignant tumours of the nasal fossae and anterior and middle cranial fossa. However, new limitations have also been identified, such as bleeding and cerebrospinal fluid leak, as well as the need to use several instruments simultaneously. Can robotics provide solutions to these problems?

METHOD

Review of the literature based on the three main databases: Medline, Pubmed and Cochrane.

RESULTS

Ten publications were identified. Some authors have developed surgical approaches to the skull base using the da Vinci(®) robot, while others have designed specific robots.

CONCLUSION

None of the currently available solutions appears to be completely suitable. The da Vinci(®) robot is very cumbersome and can only be used in the middle cranial fossa via complex and relatively invasive routes. The other robots are laboratory prototypes. We are currently developing an innovative, compact, ergonomic and safe dedicated endoscope holder.

Innovative endoscopic sino-nasal and anterior skull base robotics

PURPOSE

Design a compact, ergonomic, and safe endoscope positioner dedicated to the sino-nasal tract, and the anterior and middle-stage skull base.

METHODS

A motion and force analysis of the surgeon's movement was performed on cadaver heads to gather objective data for specification purposes. An experimental comparative study was then performed with three different kinematics, again on cadaver heads, in order to define the best architecture satisfying the motion and force requirements.

RESULTS

We quantified the maximal forces applied on the endoscope when traversing the sino-nasal tract in order to evaluate the forces that the robot should be able to overcome. We also quantified the minimal forces that should not be exceeded in order to avoid damaging vital structures. We showed that the entrance point of the endoscope into the nostril could not be considered, as in laparoscopic surgery, as a fixed point but rather as a fixed region whose location and dimensions depend on the targeted sinus.

CONCLUSION

From the safety and ergonomic points of view, the best solution would be a co-manipulated standard 6-degree of freedom robot to which is attached a gimbal-like passive remote manipulator holding the endoscope.

Robotic surgery in otolaryngology and head and neck surgery: a review

Recent advancements in robotics technology have allowed more complex surgical procedures to be performed using minimally invasive approaches. In this article, we reviewed the role of robotic assistance in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery. We highlight the advantages of robot-assisted surgery and its clinical application in this field.

Robotic-assisted oropharyngeal reconstruction

The development of robotic surgery has brought new levels of precision and control to minimally invasive surgical techniques. Its effectiveness, well established in urologic and gynecologic surgery applications, has also been demonstrated in cardiac, endocrine and general surgery. Recently, trans-oral robotic approaches to oropharyngeal tumor resection have been reported and, by eliminating the need for morbid lip and mandible splitting approaches, trans-oral robotic surgery (TORS) has allowed a re-assessment of surgical options for early stage tumors which have until recently been treated primarily with chemoradiation. The application of the TORS approach to malignant and non-malignant conditions affecting the oropharynx has created the need to develop robotic-assisted methods of managing the resultant tissue defects and to assess and compare the effectiveness of these procedures. This report details our early experience with the use of robotic surgery for management of soft tissue defects of the oropharynx in 12 patients.

Transoral robotic surgery for head and neck cancer: a series of 17 cases

OBJECTIVES

Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) is an innovative surgical technique indicated for resection of selected head and neck cancers. The authors report their experience and discuss the indications, advantages and disadvantages of this technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventeen patients were operated by TORS in the Limoges University Hospital ENT department between March 2010 and January 2011.

RESULTS

Tumour sites were the aryepiglottic fold (n=3), piriform sinus (n=2), lateral pharyngeal wall (n=3), posterior pharyngeal wall (n=2), base of tongue (n=3), vallecula (n=1), epiglottis (n=2) and arytenoid (n=2). One patient had two primary sites treated by TORS. This series comprised two stage I (11.7%), seven stage II (41.2%), six stage III (35.4%) and two stage IVa tumours (11.7%). Mean TORS set-up and operating times were 20.5 and 39.7 minutes, respectively. No major intraoperative complication was observed. One patient was reoperated on D5 for bleeding. Fifteen patients had clear surgical margins. Swallowing was restored on D2 for nine patients. The mean length of hospital stay was 10 days. Seven patients received adjuvant radiotherapy, seven patients were treated by chemoradiotherapy and three patients were submitted to simple clinical surveillance.

CONCLUSION

TORS appears to provide new treatment options for head and neck cancers by extending the indications for endoscopic resection for selected cases of head and neck cancers. It allows effective cancer resection under excellent operating conditions with low morbidity and improved functional recovery. This new treatment modality needs to be evaluated in relation to other open surgery, endoscopic laser and chemoradiotherapy techniques.

Robotic endocrine surgery: technical details and review of the literature

Over the last decade, robotic technology has been used in multiple general surgical procedures. Endocrine surgeons have embraced this technology and subsequently transformed neck operations into more cosmetically acceptable procedures and improved ergonomics. Technical details of various robotic endocrine surgical procedures have recently been described. The aim of this review is to illustrate these technical details and analyze the current data to propose an evidence-based approach to robotic endocrine surgery.