Literature DB >> 22038293

Status of robotic assistance--a less traumatic and more accurate minimally invasive surgery?

H G Kenngott1, L Fischer, F Nickel, J Rom, J Rassweiler, B P Müller-Stich.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Robotic assistance is considered one innovation within abdominal surgery over the past decade that has the potential to compensate for the drawbacks of conventional laparoscopy, such as limited degree of freedom, 2D vision, fulcrum, and pivoting effect. Robotic systems provide corresponding solutions as 3D view, intuitive motion and enable additional degrees of freedom. This review provides an overview of the history of medical robotics, experimental studies, clinical state-of-the-art and economic impact.
METHODS: The Medline database was searched for the terms "robot, telemanipulat, and laparoscop." A total of 2,573 references were found. All references were considered for information on robotic assistance in advanced laparoscopy. Further references were obtained through cross-referencing the bibliography cited in each work.
RESULTS: In experimental studies, current robotic systems showed superior handling and ergonomics compared to conventional laparoscopic techniques. In gynecology especially for hysterectomy and in urology especially for prostatectomy, two procedures formerly performed via an open approach, the robot enables a laparoscopic approach. This results in reduced need for pain medication, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. Within abdominal surgery, clinical studies were generally unable to prove a benefit of the robot. While the benefit still remains open to discussion, robotic systems are spreading and are available worldwide in tertiary centers.
CONCLUSION: Robotic assistance will remain an intensively discussed subject since clinical benefits for most procedures have not yet been proven. The most promising procedures are those in which the robot enables a laparoscopic approach where open surgery is usually required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22038293     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-011-0859-7

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


  45 in total

1.  Geometry of laparoscopic suturing and knotting techniques.

Authors:  T Frede; C Stock; C Renner; Z Budair; Y Abdel-Salam; J Rassweiler
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery.

Authors:  J Marescaux; J Leroy; M Gagner; F Rubino; D Mutter; M Vix; S E Butner; M K Smith
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-09-27       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon's outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas E Ahlering; David Woo; Louis Eichel; David I Lee; Robert Edwards; Douglas W Skarecky
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Computer-assisted, robot-enhanced open microsurgery in an animal model.

Authors:  Colin G Knight; Attila Lorincz; Alex Cao; Kelly Gidell; Michael D Klein; Scott E Langenburg
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.878

Review 5.  Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis.

Authors:  F Keus; J A F de Jong; H G Gooszen; C J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-10-18

6.  Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse.

Authors:  Daniel S Elliott; Amy E Krambeck; George K Chow
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Obesity surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES).

Authors:  S Sauerland; L Angrisani; M Belachew; J M Chevallier; F Favretti; N Finer; A Fingerhut; M Garcia Caballero; J A Guisado Macias; R Mittermair; M Morino; S Msika; F Rubino; R Tacchino; R Weiner; E A M Neugebauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-12-02       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Simonetta Fracalanza; Carolina D'Elia; Silvia Secco; Massimo Iafrate; Stefano Cavalleri; Walter Artibani
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trial.

Authors:  S H Baik; Y T Ko; C M Kang; W J Lee; N K Kim; S K Sohn; H S Chi; C H Cho
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic fundoplication: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  B P Müller-Stich; M A Reiter; M N Wente; V V Bintintan; J Köninger; M W Büchler; C N Gutt
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 3.453

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  Current state of virtual reality simulation in robotic surgery training: a review.

Authors:  Justin D Bric; Derek C Lumbard; Matthew J Frelich; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Validation of a virtual reality-based robotic surgical skills curriculum.

Authors:  Michael Connolly; Johnathan Seligman; Andrew Kastenmeier; Matthew Goldblatt; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Open versus robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal (R-TAPP) inguinal hernia repair: a multicenter matched analysis of clinical outcomes.

Authors:  R Gamagami; E Dickens; A Gonzalez; L D'Amico; C Richardson; J Rabaza; R Kolachalam
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 4.739

4.  Proficiency training on a virtual reality robotic surgical skills curriculum.

Authors:  Justin Bric; Michael Connolly; Andrew Kastenmeier; Matthew Goldblatt; Jon C Gould
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Potential advantages of robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in comparison with conventional laparoscopic approach: a single institutional retrospective comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Koichi Suda; Mariko Man-I; Yoshinori Ishida; Yuichiro Kawamura; Seiji Satoh; Ichiro Uyama
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  [Intelligent operating room suite : From passive medical devices to the self-thinking cognitive surgical assistant].

Authors:  H G Kenngott; M Wagner; A A Preukschas; B P Müller-Stich
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Robotic transanal surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasia, transanal total mesorectal excision, and repair of complex fistulae: clinical experience with the first 18 cases at a single institution.

Authors:  S Atallah; B Martin-Perez; E Parra-Davila; T deBeche-Adams; G Nassif; M Albert; S Larach
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 8.  Computer-assisted abdominal surgery: new technologies.

Authors:  H G Kenngott; M Wagner; F Nickel; A L Wekerle; A Preukschas; M Apitz; T Schulte; R Rempel; P Mietkowski; F Wagner; A Termer; Beat P Müller-Stich
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-02-21       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  Novel simulator for robotic surgery.

Authors:  Francisco Schlottmann; Marco G Patti
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-08-31

10.  Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  Kimberly E Waite; Mark A Herman; Patrick J Doyle
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-04-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.