Robotic surgery is ready for prime time in India: Against the motion

Role of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Public Health: Its Advantages and Challenges

The modern hospital setting is closely related to engineering and technology. In a hospital, modern equipment is abundant in every department, including the operating room, intensive care unit, and laboratories. Thus, the quality of treatment provided in hospitals and technology advancements are closely tied. Robotic systems are used to support and improve the accuracy and agility of human surgeons during medical procedures. This surgical approach is commonly referred to as robotic surgery or robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). These systems are not entirely autonomous; they are managed by skilled surgeons who carry out procedures with improved accuracy and minimized invasiveness using a console and specialized instruments. Because RAS offers increased surgical precision, less discomfort after surgery, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery time, all of which improve patient outcomes and lessen the strain on healthcare resources, it plays a critical role in public health. Its minimally invasive technique benefits patients and the healthcare system by lowering problems, reducing the requirement for blood transfusions, and reducing the danger of infections related to medical care. Furthermore, the possibility of remote surgery via robotic systems can increase access to specialized care, reducing regional differences and advancing fairness in public health. In this review article, we will be covering how RAS has its role in public health.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Resident Training in Robotic Surgery in India

Background

The widespread implementation of robotic surgery in the Indian subcontinent has received mixed reactions from residents and mentors alike. To date, however, no study has documented the perception of Indian surgical trainees on the effect of robotic surgery on surgical training. Therefore, we conducted a questionnaire-based study on Indian surgical residents to assess their views about robotic surgery and the effect, they believe, it might have on resident training.

Materials and methods

Questionnaires were distributed to 300 surgical residents from programs that do not have surgical robots. All other residents, faculty, medical students, and interns were excluded from the study. The responses were collected and analyzed using appropriate statistical methods.

Results

Overall, 210 surgical residents responded to the survey. A majority of them (57.72%) reported low levels of knowledge regarding robotic surgery. While 88.10% of the study participants reported that the use of robotic surgery will continue to rise in India, an equal proportion (88%) believed that procuring a robot in their program will impair their training in open and laparoscopic surgeries.

Conclusions

The introduction of robotic surgery into surgical residency programs is seen, by most residents, as a threat to training in traditional surgical methods. This calls for the effective incorporation of robotic training into residency training with equal distribution of resident training cases in programs across the country.

Role of laparoscopy in the era of robotic surgery in urology in developing countries

With the rapid expansion of robotic platforms in urology, there is an urgent and unmet need to review its cost and benefits in comparison to the traditional laparoscopy, especially in reference to a developing country. A nonsystematic review of the literature was conducted to compare the outcomes of pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted urologic procedures. Available literature over the past 30 years was reviewed. Robot-assisted surgery and laparoscopy were found to have similar outcomes in the areas of radical prostatectomy, partial and radical nephrectomy, radical cystectomy, retroperitoneal lymph node (LN) dissection, inguinal LN dissection, donor nephrectomy, and kidney transplantation. Robot-assisted surgery was found to be significantly costlier than pure laparoscopy. In the absence of a clear advantage of robot-assisted surgery over pure laparoscopy, lack of widespread availability and the currently prohibitive cost of robotic technology, laparoscopic urological surgery has a definite role in the developing world.

Robotic spine surgery: Ushering in a new era

The endeavour to make spine surgery safe with reproducible, consistent outcomes has led to growing interest and research in the field of intraoperative imaging, navigation and robotics. The advent of surgical robot systems in spine surgery is relatively recent - with only a few systems approved for commercial use. At present, pedicle screw insertion remains the primary application of robotic systems in spine surgery. The purported advantages of robot-assisted pedicle screw insertion over other conventional techniques are its increased accuracy, reproducible consistency and reduced radiation exposure. Many of these claims have been supported or refuted by individual studies - and high quality evidence for the same is lacking. Robotic spine surgery also has its share of limitations which include increased operative time, considerable learning curve and technical pitfalls unique to the robotic systems. The applications of robotic spine surgery are evolving and expanding to spinal deformity, spine oncology and needle-based interventional treatments. This review provides an overview of the evolution and current status of robotic spine surgery along with an evidence-based discussion of its current applications in spine surgery.