Benefits of Robotic Camera Assistance in Minimally Invasive Bariatric Procedures: Prospective Clinical Trial Using a Joystick-Guided Camera-Holder

BACKGROUND

While minimally invasive surgery is a growing sector in medicine, camera assistance remains a problem. Especially in bariatric surgery, the assistant holding the camera faces certain challenges. Furthermore, unless the surgeon controls the camera movement themselves, they will be challenged by an unstable image. The aim of this study was to investigate the benefits of a robotic camera assistant (SoloAssist®, AKTORmed™ GmbH, Barbing, Germany) in bariatric surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred thirty one consecutive laparoscopic bariatric procedures were performed with the assistance of a camera robot, including Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy, and gastroplication. Failures and aborts were documented and 6 surgeons were interviewed regarding their experiences using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

In 18 of 331 procedures, robotic assistance was aborted and the procedure was continued manually, mostly because of a need for frequent changes of position in narrow spaces and adverse angles. Two short circuits, 4 joystick faliures and one malfunction of the control unit were reported. All of the surgeons preferred robotic to human assistance, mostly because of a steady image and the capacity for self-control.

DISCUSSION

The SoloAssist® is a reliable system for minimal invasive procedures, especially in bariatric surgery. It provides more comfortable conditions for the surgeon and their assistant by freeing one hand for other purposes. Even in narrow spaces (e.g., between a voluminous stomach and adipose liver), the robot guarantees a steady image. Slight movements of the camera can be precisely controlled, which leads to increased comfort for the surgeon.

Robotic Camera Assistance and Its Benefit in 1033 Traditional Laparoscopic Procedures: Prospective Clinical Trial Using a Joystick-guided Camera Holder

Despite advances in instruments and techniques in laparoscopic surgery, one thing remains uncomfortable: the camera assistance. The aim of this study was to investigate the benefit of a joystick-guided camera holder (SoloAssist®, Aktormed, Barbing, Germany) for laparoscopic surgery and to compare the robotic assistance to human assistance. 1033 consecutive laparoscopic procedures were performed assisted by the SoloAssist®. Failures and aborts were documented and nine surgeons were interviewed by questionnaire regarding their experiences. In 71 of 1033 procedures, robotic assistance was aborted and the procedure was continued manually, mostly because of frequent changes of position, narrow spaces, and adverse angular degrees. One case of short circuit was reported. Emergency stop was necessary in three cases due to uncontrolled movement into the abdominal cavity. Eight of nine surgeons prefer robotic to human assistance, mostly because of a steady image and self-control. The SoloAssist® robot is a reliable system for laparoscopic procedures. Emergency shutdown was necessary in only three cases. Some minor weak spots could have been identified. Most surgeons prefer robotic assistance to human assistance. We feel that the SoloAssist® makes standard laparoscopic surgery more comfortable and further development is desirable, but it cannot fully replace a human assistant.