Literature DB >> 11573041

Robotic surgical training in an academic institution.

W R Chitwood1, L W Nifong, W H Chapman, J E Felger, B M Bailey, T Ballint, K G Mendleson, V B Kim, J A Young, R A Albrecht.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To detail robotic procedure development and clinical applications for mitral valve, biliary, and gastric reflux operations, and to implement a multispecialty robotic surgery training curriculum for both surgeons and surgical teams. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Remote, accurate telemanipulation of intracavitary instruments by general and cardiac surgeons is now possible. Complex technologic advancements in surgical robotics require well-designed training programs. Moreover, efficient robotic surgical procedures must be developed methodically and safely implemented clinically.
METHODS: Advanced training on robotic systems provides surgeon confidence when operating in tiny intracavitary spaces. Three-dimensional vision and articulated instrument control are essential. The authors' two da Vinci robotic systems have been dedicated to procedure development, clinical surgery, and training of surgical specialists. Their center has been the first United States site to train surgeons formally in clinical robotics.
RESULTS: Established surgeons and residents have been trained using a defined robotic surgical educational curriculum. Also, 30 multispecialty teams have been trained in robotic mechanics and electronics. Initially, robotic procedures were developed experimentally and are described. In the past year the authors have performed 52 robotic-assisted clinical operations: 18 mitral valve repairs, 20 cholecystectomies, and 14 Nissen fundoplications. These respective operations required 108, 28, and 73 minutes of robotic telemanipulation to complete. Procedure times for the last half of the abdominal operations decreased significantly, as did the knot-tying time in mitral operations. There have been no deaths and few complications. One mitral patient had postoperative bleeding.
CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery can be performed safely with excellent results. The authors have developed an effective curriculum for training teams in robotic surgery. After training, surgeons have applied these methods effectively and safely.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11573041      PMCID: PMC1422071          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200110000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  29 in total

Review 1.  State of the art review: videoscopic minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. Trekking to a totally endoscopic operation.

Authors:  W R Chitwood
Journal:  Heart Surg Forum       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 0.676

Review 2.  Virtual reality: surgical application--challenge for the new millennium.

Authors:  A H Meier; C L Rawn; T M Krummel
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  The Leipzig experience with robotic valve surgery.

Authors:  R Autschbach; J F Onnasch; V Falk; T Walther; M Krüger; L O Schilling; F W Mohr
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.620

Review 4.  Robotic cardiac valve surgery: transcending the technologic crevasse!

Authors:  J E Felger; L W Nifong; W R Chitwood
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.161

5.  Robotic Nissen fundoplication: alternative surgical technique for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  W H Chapman; J A Young; R J Albrecht; V B Kim; L W Nifong; W R Chitwood
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 1.878

Review 6.  Early experience with telemanipulative robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy using da Vinci.

Authors:  Victor B Kim; William H H Chapman; Robert J Albrecht; B Marcus Bailey; James A Young; L Wiley Nifong; W Randolph Chitwood
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.719

7.  Computer-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy with the da Vinci surgical robot.

Authors:  William H H Chapman; Robert J Albrecht; Victor B Kim; James A Young; W Randolph Chitwood
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.878

8.  Laparoscopic laser cholecystectomy. A comparison with mini-lap cholecystectomy.

Authors:  E J Reddick; D O Olsen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Evolution of mitral valve surgery: toward a totally endoscopic approach.

Authors:  J E Felger; W R Chitwood; L W Nifong; D Holbert
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.330

10.  Initial prospective multicenter clinical trial of robotically-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  R J Damiano; H A Tabaie; M J Mack; J R Edgerton; C Mullangi; W P Graper; S M Prasad
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.330

View more
  49 in total

1.  What is the value of telerobotic technology in gastrointestinal surgery?

Authors:  A Perez; M J Zinner; S W Ashley; D C Brooks; E E Whang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-01-18       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the learning curve of a simulated surgical task on the da Vinci system.

Authors:  J D Hernandez; S D Bann; Y Munz; K Moorthy; V Datta; S Martin; A Dosis; F Bello; A Darzi; T Rockall
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-02-02       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Robotic surgery update.

Authors:  G Jacobsen; F Elli; S Horgan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-04-21       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  An intelligent catheter system robotic controlled catheter system.

Authors:  M Negoro; M Tanimoto; F Arai; T Fukuda; K Fukasaku; I Takahashi; S Miyachi
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2002-01-10       Impact factor: 1.610

5.  Education and training in pediatric robotic surgery: lessons learned from an inaugural multinational workshop.

Authors:  Thomas P Cundy; Erik K Mayer; Juan I Camps; Lars H Olsen; Gloria Pelizzo; Guang-Zhong Yang; Ara Darzi; Azad S Najmaldin
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-10-17

Review 6.  Training and outcome monitoring in robotic urologic surgery.

Authors:  Daniel Liberman; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Claudio Jeldres; Luc Valiquette; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 7.  Robotic surgery: applications, limitations, and impact on surgical education.

Authors:  Bishoy Morris
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2005-09-27

8.  A consensus document on robotic surgery.

Authors:  D M Herron; M Marohn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-12-28       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Transoral robotic surgery of the central skull base: preclinical investigations.

Authors:  F J J Fernandez-Nogueras; M J Katati; M A Arraez Sanchez; M Molina Martinez; M Sanchez Carrion
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Making the Jump: A Qualitative Analysis on the Transition From Bedside Assistant to Console Surgeon in Robotic Surgery Training.

Authors:  Beiqun Zhao; Hannah M Hollandsworth; Arielle M Lee; Jenny Lam; Nicole E Lopez; Benjamin Abbadessa; Samuel Eisenstein; Bard C Cosman; Sonia L Ramamoorthy; Lisa A Parry
Journal:  J Surg Educ       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 2.891

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.