Literature DB >> 15731560

Robotics in colorectal surgery.

J Hance1, T Rockall, A Darzi.   

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery has been shown to offer many advantages to general surgical patients but has not been widely adopted for colorectal disease. Initial fears surrounding the oncological safety of laparoscopic colectomies have largely subsided but the technical challenges still remain. Surgical robots or telemanipulators present the laparoscopic surgeon with unrivaled dexterity and vision, which may allow colonic resections to be completed with greater ease. Although initial studies suggest promising results using currently available systems, it will take further time for patient benefits to be proven, therefore justifying the greater expense of operating with this new technology. Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15731560     DOI: 10.1159/000081350

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Surg        ISSN: 0253-4886            Impact factor:   2.588


  18 in total

1.  Laparoscopic surgery--15 years after clinical introduction.

Authors:  Reinhard Bittner
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 2.  Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: report of the first case in Hong Kong and China with an updated literature review.

Authors:  Simon Siu-Man Ng; Janet Fung-Yee Lee; Raymond Ying-Chang Yiu; Jimmy Chak-Man Li; Sophie Sok-Fei Hon
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-05-07       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Clinical outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery.

Authors:  Li-Jen Kuo; Yen-Kuang Lin; Chun-Chao Chang; Cheng-Jeng Tai; Jeng-Fong Chiou; Yu-Jia Chang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-02-23       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables.

Authors:  Alberto Zarak; Alvaro Castillo; Kandace Kichler; Lucy de la Cruz; Leonardo Tamariz; Srinivas Kaza
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Prospective study comparing standard and robotically assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Peter Kornprat; Georg Werkgartner; Herwig Cerwenka; Heinz Bacher; Azab El-Shabrawi; Peter Rehak; Hans Jörg Mischinger
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2006-05-06       Impact factor: 3.445

6.  Integrated operation systems and voice recognition in minimally invasive surgery: comparison of two systems.

Authors:  Aristotelis Perrakis; Werner Hohenberger; Thomas Horbach
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Chang Woo Kim; Chang Hee Kim; Seung Hyuk Baik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision: is there a learning curve?

Authors:  Yasir Akmal; Jeong-Heum Baek; Shaun McKenzie; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Alessio Pigazzi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  The EndoAssist robotic camera holder as an aid to the introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  J M Gilbert
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 10.  Surgical Techniques for Robotically-Assisted Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair.

Authors:  Chigozirim N Ekeke; Matthew Vercauteren; Nicholas Baker; Inderpal Sarkaria
Journal:  Thorac Surg Clin       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 1.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.