Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy with the Aid of the AESOP 2000 Robot/Invited comment

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robot-assisted adrenalectomy and laparoscopic adrenalectomy: a propensity score matching analysis

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RAA) and laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) using propensity score matching. This retrospective study included 395 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy: 354 who underwent LA and 41 who underwent RAA between February 2015 and March 2023. To mitigate potential confounding factors, 2:1 propensity score matching was conducted based on age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor laterality, and tumor size. Perioperative outcomes and complications were compared between the two groups, and prognostic factors for complications were analyzed. Propensity score matching analysis identified 123 patients, with 82 and 41 in the LA and RAA groups, respectively. Operative time (81.4 ± 26.6 min vs. 83.5 ± 25.9 min, P = 0.675), estimated blood loss (77.7 ± 68.3 mL vs. 83.2 ± 73.9 mL, P = 0.683), and post-operative stay (3.8 ± 1.0 days vs. 4.0 ± 0.9 days, P = 0.211) showed no significant differences between two groups. Intraoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (9.8%) in the LA group, while no patients (0%) experienced intraoperative complications in the RAA group (P = 0.051). In both groups, post-operative complications occurred in 2.4% (P = 1). The only factor contributing to complications after adrenalectomy was tumor size (OR 1.026, 95% CI 1.001-1.051, P = 0.042). RAA exhibited comparable perioperative outcomes and presented an improved intraoperative complication rate compared with LA. Tumor size was the only factor that contributed to complications after adrenalectomy.

Exploring the Benefits of a Reduced-Port Approach in Robotic Posterior Retroperitoneoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Comparative Study of the Two-Port and Three-Port Techniques

Background: Robotic adrenalectomy has become a surgical treatment option for benign and selected malignant adrenal diseases. We aimed to evaluate the eligibility of two-port robotic posterior retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy (PRA) as an alternative to the conventional three-port technique by comparing their surgical outcomes. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared the clinicopathological factors and surgical outcomes among 197 patients who underwent two-port or three-port robotic adrenalectomy between 2016 and 2020 in a single tertiary center. For further evaluation, propensity score matching was performed to reduce the selection bias in population characteristics. Results: Patients were categorized by the number of ports (two-port group, 87; and three-port group, 110). The two-port group compared with the three-port group was significantly older (P = .006) and had a smaller mean tumor size (P = .003) and shorter mean operation time (P = .001). Upon comparing clinicopathologic characteristics according to adrenal disorders, for pheochromocytoma, the three-port group had a larger tumor size and a longer operation time. For Cushing's syndrome, the operation time was short and numeric rating scale pain score was significantly low in the two-port group. After propensity score matching, the two-port group had a short operation time and a significantly low postoperative pain score (P < .05). Predictive factors associated with prolonged operation time included male gender, an increased number of ports, and large tumor size. Conclusions: The two-port technique resulted in a shorter operation time and lower pain score compared with the three-port technique. The two-port technique may be a safe alternative to the conventional three-port technique for robotic PRA.

Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Adrenalectomy for Large Pheochromocytoma (≥ 5cm): A Retrospective Study

Purpose

The objective of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes in patients with large (≥5cm) pheochromocytomas who underwent adrenalectomy.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) and robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) for large pheochromocytoma (≥ 5cm) at our center between January 2015 to February 2023. We compared the perioperative outcomes between the two groups and investigated impact of high Nor-Metanephrine (NMN) levels on perioperative outcomes by analyzing this subgroup.

Results

A total of 115 patients were included in the study, with 48 patients in the robotic group and 67 patients in the laparoscopic group. The following significant difference were identified in favor of RA: shorter operative (excluding docking time) time (190.0 vs 220.0 min, p=0.002), lower estimated blood loss (50.0 vs 120.0 mL, p=0.013), however, RA group has higher surgical expenses (37933.0 vs 7936.0 CNY, p< 0.001). This finding remained consistent when analyzing patients with high NMN levels.

Conclusion

Patients with large pheochromocytoma may experience reduced blood loss and shorter operative time when undergoing robot-assisted adrenalectomy. However, it is important to note that the RA approach is associated with significantly higher costs.

A review on tele-manipulators for remote diagnostic procedures and surgery

With modern medicine and healthcare services improving in leaps and bounds, the integration of telemedicine has helped in expanding these specialised healthcare services to remote locations. Healthcare telerobotic systems form a component of telemedicine, which allows medical intervention from a distance. It has been nearly 40 years since a robotic technology, PUMA 560, was introduced to perform a stereotaxic biopsy in the brain. The use of telemanipulators for remote surgical procedures began around 1995, with the Aesop, the Zeus, and the da Vinci robotic surgery systems. Since then, the utilisation of robots has steadily increased in diverse healthcare disciplines, from clinical diagnosis to telesurgery. The telemanipulator system functions in a master–slave protocol mode, with the doctor operating the master system, aided by audio-visual and haptic feedback. Based on the control commands from the master, the slave system, a remote manipulator, interacts directly with the patient. It eliminates the requirement for the doctor to be physically present in the spatial vicinity of the patient by virtually bringing expert-guided medical services to them. Post the Covid-19 pandemic, an exponential surge in the utilisation of telerobotic systems has been observed. This study aims to present an organised review of the state-of-the-art telemanipulators used for remote diagnostic procedures and surgeries, highlighting their challenges and scope for future research and development.

The new robotic platform Hugo™ RAS for lateral transabdominal adrenalectomy: a first world report of a series of five cases

Robotic assisted surgery is the most rapidly developing field of minimally invasive surgery. Its wide diffusion has led to the development and standardization of robotic-assisted approaches also for adrenalectomy. In this study, we present the first five robotic-assisted lateral transabdominal adrenalectomies performed with the new Hugo RAS™ system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). After an official training course of the surgical team, five consecutive patients scheduled for unilateral adrenalectomy, underwent robotic-assisted operations in our institution. Patients that were candidates for partial adrenalectomy were excluded. A description of the operating theatre, robotic arms and docking setup is provided. Four female and one male patient underwent lateral transabdominal adrenalectomy, three for lesions on the left side and two on the right. Median lesion size was 3.9 cm (range: 30-90) and preoperative diagnosis was Cushing's syndrome in three patients, an adrenal cystic lesion and a pheochromocytoma. The median docking time was 5 min (range: 5-8) and the median console time was 55 min (range: 29-108). Procedures were performed without intraoperative complications and no conversions or additional ports were needed. System's function and docking were uneventful. Based on our initial experience, adrenalectomy with the Hugo™ system is feasible. This study provides technical notes for other centres that wish to perform robotic-assisted adrenalectomies with the Hugo™ RAS as well as general information and our preliminary insights on this new platform.

Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic in adrenalectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) and laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) Guidelines. Five databases, including Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. The search timeframe was set from the creation of the database to December 2021.

RESULTS

There were 26 studies including 2985 patients. Our study found that the robotic technique was superior to conventional laparoscopy for estimated blood loss (WMD = -18.25, 95% CI [-27.85, -8.65], P < 0.01), length of stay (WMD = -0.45, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.33], P < 0.01), and conversion to open (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.12, 0.78], P = 0.01), while complications and readmissions were comparable. Interestingly, there was no difference in operative time between the two surgical modalities, but subgroup analysis found that the retroperitoneal route robotic technique took longer (WMD = 14.64, 95% CI [0.04, 29.24], P < 0.05), whereas the study of the mixed surgical modality (RA versus LA with mixed transabdominal and retroperitoneal surgical routes) found that the robot required less time (WMD = -12.29, 95% CI [-22.86, -1.72], P < 0.05). For pheochromocytoma, RA was superior to LA in terms of length of stay (WMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.83, -0.15], P < 0.01), with no difference in other indicators.

CONCLUSION

robotic-assisted adrenalectomy is a superior technique to conventional laparoscopy in managing adrenal tumors, even in the case of a specific adrenal tumor - pheochromocytoma.

Robotics in laparoscopic surgery - A review

Because of the increasing use of laparoscopic surgeries, robotic technologies have been developed to overcome the challenges these surgeries impose on surgeons. This paper presents an overview of the current state of surgical robots used in laparoscopic surgeries. Four main categories were discussed: handheld laparoscopic devices, laparoscope positioning robots, master–slave teleoperated systems with dedicated consoles, and robotic training systems. A generalized control block diagram is developed to demonstrate the general control scheme for each category of surgical robots. In order to review these robotic technologies, related published works were investigated and discussed. Detailed discussions and comparison tables are presented to compare their effectiveness in laparoscopic surgeries. Each of these technologies has proved to be beneficial in laparoscopic surgeries.

Safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive adrenalectomy versus open adrenalectomy in patients with large adrenal tumors (≥5 cm): A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive adrenalectomy (MIA) with open adrenalectomy (OA) in patients with large adrenal tumors (≥5 cm).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of the primary outcomes according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) Guidelines. Five databases including Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. The time frame of the search was set from the creation of the database to March 2022.

RESULTS

Ten studies including 898 patients were included. Compared to OA, MIA is superior for length of stay [LOS WMD = -3.52, 95% CI (-4.61, -2.43), P < 0.01], drainage time [DT WMD = -0.68, 95% CI (-1.27, -0.09), P < 0.05] and fasting time [FT WMD = -0.95, 95% CI (-1.35, -0.55), P < 0.01], estimated blood loss [EBL WMD = -314.22, 95% CI (-494.76, -133.69), P < 0.01] and transfusion [WMD = -416.73, 95% CI (-703.75, -129.72), P < 0.01], while operative time (OT) and complications are not statistically different. For pheochromocytoma, MIA remains superior for LOS [WMD = -3.10, 95% CI (-4.61, -1.60), P < 0.01] and EBL [WMD = -273.65, 95% CI (-457.44, -89.86), P < 0.01], while OT and complications are not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

MIA offers advantages over OA in the management of large adrenal tumors, including in the case of a specific large adrenal tumor - large pheochromocytoma.

A comparison of robotic and laparoscopic minimally invasive adrenalectomy for adrenal malignancies

BACKGROUND

Although guidelines recommend open adrenalectomy for most resectable adrenal malignancies, minimally invasive adrenalectomies are performed. Robotic adrenalectomies have become more popular recently, but there is a paucity of literature comparing laparoscopic and robotic resections.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a planned minimally invasive adrenalectomy for adrenal malignancies (adrenocortical carcinoma, malignant pheochromocytoma, other carcinoma) were identified in the National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was the conversion rate from minimally invasive to open. Other post-operative outcomes and survival were compared.

RESULTS

416 patients (76.5%) underwent a laparoscopic adrenalectomy and 128 (23.5%) underwent a robotic operation. Demographics and clinical characteristics were similar. Approximately 19% of tumors resected by a minimally invasive approach were > 10 cm. The intra-operative conversion rate was decreased among robotic adrenalectomies relative to laparoscopic on univariate (7.8% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.005) and multivariable (odds ratio 0.39, p = 0.01) analyses. Using marginal standardization, there was a stepwise increase in the conversion rate as tumor size increased (< 5, 5-10, > 10 cm) for laparoscopic (7.5%, 18.0%, 33.2%) and robotic (3.1%, 8.3%, 17.3%) adrenalectomies. Operations which required conversion had a greater margin positivity rate, greater length of stay, and an association with poor overall survival.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to most clinical guidelines, minimally invasive adrenalectomies are being performed on large malignant tumors. A laparoscopic approach was associated with a greater conversion rate and subsequent poor outcomes. If a surgeon is not planning an open adrenalectomy, but adrenal malignancy is a possibility, robotic adrenalectomy may be the preferred approach for resectable adrenal tumors.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: Pluriannual Experience in a High-Volume Center Evaluating Indications and Results

Background: Robotic adrenalectomy offers several clinical benefits if compared with laparoscopic adrenalectomy; however, its superiority is still under debate. The aim of this study was the investigation of differences between the two techniques, and a comparison when approaching right or left side adrenal lesions was further conducted. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic unilateral adrenalectomy at our institution from January 2006 to December 2019 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Statistical analysis was conducted; differences between the two cohorts were reported. Results: A total of 160 cases were included (84 patients in laparoscopic adrenalectomy-group [LA-g] 76 cases in robotic adrenalectomy-group [RA-g]). The groups were homogeneous for demographic data. No intraoperative complications were reported; mean amount of intraoperative blood loss was comparable. No cases of conversion to open surgery were required. RA-g presented a longer operative time than LA-g for right adrenalectomy (P = .05), no differences were noted for left side (P = .187). Overall morbidity was 21% for LA-g and 10.5% for RA-g (P = .087), with an inferior rate of surgical complications for RA-g (P = .024), and for robotic left adrenalectomy than robotic right procedure (P = .03). Length of hospital stay was shorter for RA-g (P = .005). Conclusions: Robotic adrenalectomy presents similar outcomes as laparoscopic approach with some benefits for selected cases. Left adrenal lesions seem to receive greater advantages from robotic technique. Large randomized controlled trials are required to determine the role of robotic adrenal surgery and if the indication can be standardized based on the laterality of adrenal procedure.

Laparoscopic versus robotic adrenalectomy: a review of the national inpatient sample

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) has become the standard treatment of adrenal lesions. Recently, robotic-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) has become an option, however, short-term outcomes for RA have not been well studied and benefits over LA are debatable. The aim of this study was to explore differences in short-term outcomes between LA and RA using the national inpatient sample (NIS) database.

METHODS

Patient data were collected from the NIS. All patients undergoing LA or RA from January 2009 to December 2012 were included. Univariate analysis and propensity matching were performed to look for differences between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1006 patients (66.4% in LA group and 33.6% in RA group) were identified. Patient age group, gender, race, risk of mortality, severity of illness or indication for adrenalectomy did not differ significantly between the LA or RA cohorts. Insurance type predicted procedure type (45% of medicare patients underwent RA versus 29% of patients with private insurance, p < 0.0001). Patients living in the highest income areas were more likely to receive the laparoscopic approach (31.7 versus 17.4%, p < 0.0001). Hospital volume, bed size and teaching status of the hospital were not significant factors in the decision of RA versus LA. There was no difference in complication and conversion rates between RA versus LA. The mean length of stay was shorter in the RA group (2.2 versus 1.9 days, p = 0.03). Total charges were higher in the RA group ($42,659 versus $33,748, p < 0.0001). There was a significant trend towards more adrenalectomies being performed robotic assisted by year. Only 22% of adrenalectomies were performed robotic-assisted in 2009 compared with 48% in 2012.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall benefit for RA remains small and higher total charges for RA may currently outweigh the benefits. These findings may change as more cases are performed robotically assisted and robotic technology improves.

Laparoscopic versus robotic adrenalectomy: A comprehensive meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of robotic adrenalectomy (RA) compared to laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is still debatable. The purpose of this paper was to systematically review and synthesize all available evidence comparing RA to LA so as to evaluate which procedure provides superior clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed and Scopus databases was performed with respect to the PRISMA statement (end-of-search date: January 31, 2016). Data on perioperative variables were extracted by three independent reviewers. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included in this review (13 comparative and 14 non-comparative). Overall, 1162 patients underwent adrenalectomy (747 treated with RA and 415 with LA). There was no significant difference between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups for intraoperative complications (OR: 1.20; 95%CI, 0.33-4.38), postoperative complications (OR: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.36-1.31), mortality (OR: 0.42; 95%CI, 0.07-2.72), conversion to laparotomy (OR: 0.51; 95%CI, 0.21-1.23), conversion to laparotomy or laparoscopy (OR: 0.73; 95%CI, 0.32-1.69) and blood loss (WMD: -9.78; 95%, -22.10 to 2.53). For patients treated with RA, there was a significantly shorter hospital stay (WMD: -0.40; 95% CI, -0.64 to -0.17) and a significantly longer operating time (WMD: 15.60; 95%CI, 2.12 to 29.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic adrenalectomy is a safe and feasible procedure with similar clinical outcomes as the laparoscopic approach in selected patient populations. High quality RCTs as well as uniform and detailed reporting of outcomes are needed to determine the role and cost-effectiveness of robotic adrenal surgery in the years to come.

Robotic assisted adrenalectomy: Is it ready for prime time?

Adrenal surgery is undergoing continuous evolution and minimally invasive surgery is increasingly being used for the surgical management of adrenal masses. With robotic-assisted surgery being a widely accepted surgical treatment for many urological conditions such as prostate carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma, the use of the robot has been expanded to include robotic-assisted adrenalectomy, offering an alternative minimally invasive platform for adrenal surgery. We performed a literature review on robotic-assisted adrenalectomy, reviewing the current surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes.

Robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses.

OBJECTIVE

To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 3.01 to -1.74; p<0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p=0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39-1.75; p=0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, -6.02 to 17.79; p=0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: -0.43; 95% CI, -0.56 to -0.30; p<0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: -18.21; 95% CI, -29.11 to -7.32; p=0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.00; p=0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of large adrenal tumors

BACKGROUND

Although recent studies have shown the feasibility and safety of robotic adrenalectomy, an advantage over the laparoscopic approach has not been demonstrated. Our hypothesis was that the use of the robot would facilitate minimally invasive resection of large adrenal tumors.

METHODS

Adrenal tumors≥5 cm resected robotically were compared with those removed laparoscopically from a prospective institutional review board-approved adrenal database. Clinical and perioperative parameters were analyzed using t and chi-square tests. All data are expressed as mean±standard error of mean.

RESULTS

There were 24 patients with 25 tumors in the robotic group and 38 patients with 38 tumors in the laparoscopic group. Tumor size was similar in both groups (6.5±0.4 [robotic] vs 6.2±0.3 cm [laparoscopic], P=.661). Operative time was shorter for the robotic versus laparoscopic group (159.4±13.4 vs 187.2±8.3 min, respectively, P=.043), while estimated blood loss was similar (P=.147). The conversion to open rate was less in the robotic (4%) versus the laparoscopic (11%) group; P=.043. Hospital stay was shorter for the robotic group (1.4±0.2 vs 1.9±0.1 days, respectively, P=.009). The 30-day morbidity was 0 in robotic and 2.7% in laparoscopic group. Pathology was similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that the use of the robot could shorten operative time and decrease the rate of conversion to open for adrenal tumors larger than 5 cm. Based on our favorable experience, robotic adrenalectomy has become our preferred minimally invasive surgical approach for removing large adrenal tumors.

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.

Robotic-assisted adrenalectomy: what advantages compared to lateral transperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy?

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) compared with lateral transperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA).

METHODS

Prospective evaluation of 50 patients who underwent unilateral RA versus 59 patients who underwent unilateral LA.

RESULTS

RA was associated with lower blood loss (49 mL) but longer operative times (104 minutes) (P < .001). However, the difference in operative time was not significant after the learning curve of 20 cases. In patients with body mass index (BMI) > or = 30 kg/m(2), mean operative time was longer in the LA group (90 vs 78 minutes, P = .03) but not in the RA group. In patients with large tumors (> or = 55 mm), mean operative time was longer in the LA group (100 vs 80 minutes, P = .009) but not in the RA group. Conversion rate, morbidity, and hospital stay were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

After a learning curve of 20 cases, RA has similar perioperative outcomes compared to lateral transperitoneal LA. Several criteria (previous laparoscopic expertise, first assistant's skill and tumor side) remain determinative on RA operative time.

Camera and instrument holders and their clinical value in minimally invasive surgery

During minimally invasive procedures an assistant is controlling the laparoscope. Ideally, the surgeon should be able to manipulate all instruments including the camera him/herself, to avoid communication problems and disturbing camera movements. Camera holders return camera-control to the surgeon and stabilize the laparoscopic image. An additional holder can be used to stabilize an extra laparoscopic instrument for retracting. A literature survey has been carried out giving an overview of the existing "robotic" and passive camera and instrument holders and, if available, results of their clinical value. Benefits and limitations were identified. Most studies showed that camera holders, passive and active, provide the surgeon with a more stable image and enables them to control their own view direction. Only the passive holders were suitable for holding instruments. Comparisons between different systems are reviewed. Both active and passive camera and instrument holders are functional, and may be helpful to perform solo-surgery. The benefits of active holders are questionable in relation to the performance of the much simpler passive designs.

Robotics and general surgery

Robotics are now being used in all surgical fields, including general surgery. By increasing intra-abdominal articulations while operating through small incisions, robotics are increasingly being used for a large number of visceral and solid organ operations, including those for the gallbladder, esophagus, stomach, intestines, colon, and rectum, as well as for the endocrine organs. Robotics and general surgery are blending for the first time in history and as a specialty field should continue to grow for many years to come. We continuously demand solutions to questions and limitations that are experienced in our daily work. Laparoscopy is laden with limitations such as fixed axis points at the trocar insertion sites, two-dimensional video monitors, limited dexterity at the instrument tips, lack of haptic sensation, and in some cases poor ergonomics. The creation of a surgical robot system with 3D visual capacity seems to deal with most of these limitations. Although some in the surgical community continue to test the feasibility of these surgical robots and to question the necessity of such an expensive venture, others are already postulating how to improve the next generation of telemanipulators, and in so doing are looking beyond today's horizon to find simpler solutions. As the robotic era enters the world of the general surgeon, more and more complex procedures will be able to be approached through small incisions. As technology catches up with our imaginations, robotic instruments (as opposed to robots) and 3D monitoring will become routine and continue to improve patient care by providing surgeons with the most precise, least traumatic ways of treating surgical disease.