Literature DB >> 19874297

Critical appraisal of technical problems with robotic urological surgery.

Rishi Nayyar1, Narmada P Gupta.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To record the technical problems and complications associated with the use of da Vinci S robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and to review previous reports.
METHODS: We analysed our records for all machine- or instrument-related errors during the course of 340 consecutive robot-assisted urological operations at our centre from July 2006 to March 2009, using one robotic machine. The cause of the error (machine or human), troubleshooting methods and consequences of the errors were evaluated.
RESULTS: The overall device failure rate was 10.9% (37/340). The most frequent technical problems were related to robotic instruments (23/37). Other failures included colour/hue changes in the console image, intermittent double vision, fused illuminator bulb and problems with the master tool-manipulator device (hand-piece unit), patient cart circuitry, patient-side manipulator arm, closed-circuit camera unit or camera cable. Of 37 problems, 28 (76%) were surmountable during the course of surgery. The overall conversions to standard open/laparoscopic procedure attributable to mechanical failures of the robot were 0.6% (2/340). There were no complications or direct harm to the patient in any case. Most faults could be corrected or bypassed with some addition to operating room time.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite an association of various types of new technical problems with robotic surgery, it provides a safe mode of minimally invasive surgery with very low conversion rates attributable to it, and no direct patient injury.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19874297     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09039.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  13 in total

1.  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

2.  Error reporting from the da Vinci surgical system in robotic surgery: A Canadian multispecialty experience at a single academic centre.

Authors:  Emad Rajih; Côme Tholomier; Beatrice Cormier; Vanessa Samouëlian; Thomas Warkus; Moishe Liberman; Hugues Widmer; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Abdullah M Alenizi; Malek Meskawi; Roger Valdivieso; Pierre-Alain Hueber; Pierre I Karakewicz; Assaad El-Hakim; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Visual-perceptual mismatch in robotic surgery.

Authors:  Ahmad Abiri; Anna Tao; Meg LaRocca; Xingmin Guan; Syed J Askari; James W Bisley; Erik P Dutson; Warren S Grundfest
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Occult risk of broken instruments for endoscopy-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Hiroshi Yasuhara; Kazuhiko Fukatsu; Takami Komatsu; Satoshi Murakoshi; Yuhei Saito; Yushi Uetera
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Flow disruptions in robotic-assisted abdominal sacrocolpopexy: does robotic surgery introduce unforeseen challenges for gynecologic surgeons?

Authors:  Colby P Souders; Ken Catchpole; Alex Hannemann; Ronit Lyon; Karyn S Eilber; Catherine Bresee; Tara Cohen; Matthias Weigl; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Barriers to efficiency in robotic surgery: the resident effect.

Authors:  Monica Jain; Brian T Fry; Luke W Hess; Jennifer T Anger; Bruce L Gewertz; Ken Catchpole
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 7.  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

8.  Safety, efficiency and learning curves in robotic surgery: a human factors analysis.

Authors:  Ken Catchpole; Colby Perkins; Catherine Bresee; M Jonathon Solnik; Benjamin Sherman; John Fritch; Bruno Gross; Samantha Jagannathan; Niv Hakami-Majd; Raymund Avenido; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Malfunctions of robotic system in surgery: role and responsibility of surgeon in legal point of view.

Authors:  Alessia Ferrarese; Giada Pozzi; Felice Borghi; Alessandra Marano; Paola Delbon; Bruno Amato; Michele Santangelo; Claudio Buccelli; Massimo Niola; Valter Martino; Emanuele Capasso
Journal:  Open Med (Wars)       Date:  2016-08-02

10.  Perioperative outcome of initial 190 cases of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy - A single-center experience.

Authors:  P N Dogra; T D Javali; P Singh; R Kumar; A Seth; N P Gupta; R Nayyar; V Saxena; B Nayak
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2012-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.