Literature DB >> 11986012

Computer-enhanced vs. standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery.

W Scott Melvin1, Bradley J Needleman, Kevin R Krause, Carol Schneider, E Christopher Ellison.   

Abstract

Computer-assisted telesurgical devices have recently been approved in the United States for general surgery. To determine the safety and efficacy of these procedures, we performed a prospective trial of computer-enhanced "robotic" fundoplication compared to standard laparoscopic control procedures. Consecutive patients undergoing surgical treatment for gastroesophageal reflux were included. The operating surgeon worked at a console using a three-dimensional image and manipulated hand controls. Operative times, complications, and length of hospital stay were recorded. A standardized questionnaire was administered to evaluate symptoms. Twenty patients were entered into each group. There were no differences in age, preoperative weight, or sex. Operative times were significantly longer in the robot group (97 vs. 141 minutes). There were no complications and most patients went home the first postoperative day. At follow-up, symptoms were similar in both groups; however, there was a significant difference in the number of patients taking antisecretory medication--none in the robotic group but six in the laparoscopic group reported regular use. Computer-assisted laparoscopic antireflux surgery is safe. However, operative times are longer, with little difference in outcomes. At the current level of technology and experience, robotic antireflux surgery appears to offer little advantage over standard laparoscopic approaches.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11986012     DOI: 10.1016/s1091-255x(01)00032-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  7 in total

1.  Five- to eight-year outcome of the first laparoscopic Nissen fundoplications.

Authors:  T Bammer; R A Hinder; A Klaus; P J Klingler
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  A review of robotics in surgery.

Authors:  B Davies
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.617

3.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open fundoplication: blind evaluation of recovery and discharge period.

Authors:  G Nilsson; S Larsson; F Johnsson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Computer-assisted cardiac surgery.

Authors:  A Carpentier; D Loulmet; B Aupecle; A Berrebi; J Relland
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-01-30       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Computer-assisted robotic heller myotomy: initial case report.

Authors:  W S Melvin; B J Needleman; K R Krause; R K Wolf; R E Michler; E C Ellison
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.878

6.  Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: five-year results and beyond.

Authors:  T Lafullarde; D I Watson; G G Jamieson; J C Myers; P A Game; P G Devitt
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2001-02

7.  Patient satisfaction following laparoscopic and open antireflux surgery.

Authors:  D W Rattner; D C Brooks
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1995-03
  7 in total
  35 in total

1.  Robots in surgery: advanced gastrointestinal applications and credentialing.

Authors:  W Scott Melvin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Overview--current clinical and preclinical use of robotics for surgery.

Authors:  Mark A Talamini
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study.

Authors:  D Nio; W A Bemelman; O R C Busch; B C Vrouenraets; D J Gouma
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-01-14       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Early results of one-year robotic surgery using the Da Vinci system to perform advanced laparoscopic procedures.

Authors:  Ahmet Ayav; Laurent Bresler; Laurent Brunaud; Patrick Boissel
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign and oncologic pathologies: initial clinical experience with 30 patients.

Authors:  F Marchal; P Rauch; J Vandromme; I Laurent; A Lobontiu; B Ahcel; J L Verhaeghe; C Meistelman; M Degueldre; J P Villemot; F Guillemin
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-05-03       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Laparoscopic vascular anastomoses: does robotic (Zeus-Aesop) assistance help to overcome the learning curve?

Authors:  D Nio; W A Bemelman; R Balm; D A Legemate
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-05-26       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  A critical comparison of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic splenectomies.

Authors:  Johannes Bodner; Reinhold Kafka-Ritsch; Paolo Lucciarini; John H Fish; Thomas Schmid
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 8.  Recent in vivo surgical robot and mechanism developments.

Authors:  M E Rentschler; D Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-19       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Natural orifice surgery with an endoluminal mobile robot.

Authors:  Mark E Rentschler; Jason Dumpert; Stephen R Platt; Shane M Farritor; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  A computerized analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic task performance.

Authors:  Vimal K Narula; William C Watson; S Scott Davis; Kristen Hinshaw; Bradley J Needleman; Dean J Mikami; Jeffrey W Hazey; John H Winston; P Muscarella; Mike Rubin; Vipul Patel; W Scott Melvin
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.