Literature DB >> 16733761

Prospective study comparing standard and robotically assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Peter Kornprat1, Georg Werkgartner, Herwig Cerwenka, Heinz Bacher, Azab El-Shabrawi, Peter Rehak, Hans Jörg Mischinger.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Laparoscopic surgery has become the treatment of choice for cholecystectomy. Many studies showed that while this approach benefits the patient, the surgeon faces such distinct disadvantages as a poor ergonomic situation and limited degrees of freedom with limited motion as a consequence. Robots have the potential to overcome these problems. To evaluate the efficiency and feasibility of robotically assisted surgery (RAC), we designed a prospective study to compare it with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2001 and 2003, 26 patients underwent SLC and 20 patients underwent RAC using the ZEUS system. The feasibility, safety, and possible advantages were evaluated. To assess the efficacy, the total time in the operating room was divided into preoperative, operative, and postoperative time frames.
RESULTS: For RAC in comparison with SLC, the preoperative phase including equipment setup was significantly longer. In the intraoperative phase, the cut-closure time and camera and trocar insertion times were significantly longer. It is interesting to note that the net dissection time for the cystic artery, duct, and the gall bladder was not different from SLC.
CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates the feasibility of robotically assisted cholecystectomy without system-specific morbidity. There is time loss in several phases of robotic surgery due to equipment setup and deinstallation and therefore, presents no benefit in using the robot in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16733761     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-006-0046-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  18 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Efficiency of manual versus robotical (Zeus) assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks.

Authors:  D Nio; W A Bemelman; K T Boer; M S Dunker; D J Gouma; T M Gulik
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-11-16       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Analysis of procedure time in robot-assisted surgery: comparative study in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Jelle P Ruurda; Paul L Visser; Ivo A M J Broeders
Journal:  Comput Aided Surg       Date:  2003

Review 4.  Robot-assisted abdominal surgery.

Authors:  C N Gutt; T Oniu; A Mehrabi; A Kashfi; P Schemmer; M W Büchler
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Telesurgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  J Himpens; G Leman; G B Cadiere
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the European experience.

Authors:  J Perissat
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Postoperative immune function varies inversely with the degree of surgical trauma in a murine model.

Authors:  J D Allendorf; M Bessler; R L Whelan; M Trokel; D A Laird; M B Terry; M R Treat
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Update on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, including a clinical pathway.

Authors:  T R Gadacz
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.741

9.  Telerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial clinical experience with 25 patients.

Authors:  J Marescaux; M K Smith; D Fölscher; F Jamali; B Malassagne; J Leroy
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy with open cholecystectomy in a single center.

Authors:  L F Williams; W C Chapman; R A Bonau; E C McGee; R W Boyd; J K Jacobs
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 2.565

View more
  13 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Caiwen Han; Xinyi Shan; Liang Yao; Peijing Yan; Meixuan Li; Lidong Hu; Hongwei Tian; Wutang Jing; Binbin Du; Lixia Wang; Kehu Yang; Tiankang Guo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Robotic single-site versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Which is cheaper? A cost report and analysis.

Authors:  Kareem Bedeir; Andrew Mann; Yassar Youssef
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery.

Authors:  Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease in Veteran patients.

Authors:  Zoe Tao; Valerie-Sue Emuakhagbon; Thai Pham; M Mathew Augustine; Angela Guzzetta; Sergio Huerta
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-01-05

Review 5.  Robot assistant versus human or another robot assistant in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; Kumarakrishnan Samraj; Giuseppe Fusai; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-09-12

Review 6.  Instrument Failures for the da Vinci Surgical System: a Food and Drug Administration MAUDE Database Study.

Authors:  Diana C W Friedman; Thomas S Lendvay; Blake Hannaford
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Robotic cholecystectomy with new port sites.

Authors:  Ji Hun Kim; Nam Hyun Baek; Guangyl Li; Seung Hui Choi; In Ho Jeong; Jae Chul Hwang; Jin Hong Kim; Byung Moo Yoo; Wook Hwan Kim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Cost analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery procedures.

Authors:  Rana M Higgins; Matthew J Frelich; Matthew E Bosler; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-02       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Detection of Membrane Puncture with Haptic Feedback using a Tip-Force Sensing Needle.

Authors:  Santhi Elayaperumal; Jung Hwa Bae; Bruce L Daniel; Mark R Cutkosky
Journal:  Rep U S       Date:  2014-09

Review 10.  The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review.

Authors:  O A J van der Meijden; M P Schijven
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.