Literature DB >> 26416688

Robotic surgery in children: adopt now, await, or dismiss?

Thomas P Cundy1,2,3, Hani J Marcus4, Archie Hughes-Hallett4, Sanjeev Khurana5,6, Ara Darzi4.   

Abstract

The role of robot-assisted surgery in children remains controversial. This article aims to distil this debate into an evidence informed decision-making taxonomy; to adopt this technology (1) now, (2) later, or (3) not at all. Robot-assistance is safe, feasible and effective in selected cases as an adjunctive tool to enhance capabilities of minimally invasive surgery, as it is known today. At present, expectations of rigid multi-arm robotic systems to deliver higher quality care are over-estimated and poorly substantiated by evidence. Such systems are associated with high costs. Further comparative effectiveness evidence is needed to define the case-mix for which robot-assistance might be indicated. It seems unlikely that we should expect compelling patient benefits when it is only the mode of minimally invasive surgery that differs. Only large higher-volume institutions that share the robot amongst multiple specialty groups are likely to be able to sustain higher associated costs with today's technology. Nevertheless, there is great potential for next-generation surgical robotics to enable better ways to treat childhood surgical diseases through less invasive techniques that are not possible today. This will demand customized technology for selected patient populations or procedures. Several prototype robots exclusively designed for pediatric use are already under development. Financial affordability must be a high priority to ensure clinical accessibility.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pediatric; Robotic; Technology

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26416688     DOI: 10.1007/s00383-015-3800-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int        ISSN: 0179-0358            Impact factor:   1.827


  31 in total

1.  Smart tissue anastomosis robot (STAR): a vision-guided robotics system for laparoscopic suturing.

Authors:  Simon Leonard; Kyle L Wu; Yonjae Kim; Axel Krieger; Peter C W Kim
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.538

2.  The robot has no role in elective colon surgery.

Authors:  James Yoo
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 14.766

3.  SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA).

Authors:  Shawn Tsuda; Dmitry Oleynikov; Jon Gould; Dan Azagury; Bryan Sandler; Matthew Hutter; Sharona Ross; Eric Haas; Fred Brody; Richard Satava
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  For 3D laparoscopy: a step toward advanced surgical navigation: how to get maximum benefit from 3D vision.

Authors:  Wolfgang Kunert; Pirmin Storz; Andreas Kirschniak
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Comparative effectiveness research on robotic surgery.

Authors:  Joel S Weissman; Michael Zinner
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  International attitudes of early adopters to current and future robotic technologies in pediatric surgery.

Authors:  Thomas P Cundy; Hani J Marcus; Archie Hughes-Hallett; Azad S Najmaldin; Guang-Zhong Yang; Ara Darzi
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2014-07-11       Impact factor: 2.545

Review 7.  Meta analysis of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic fundoplication in children.

Authors:  Thomas P Cundy; Leanne Harling; Hani J Marcus; Thanos Athanasiou; Ara W Darzi
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2013-12-21       Impact factor: 2.545

8.  A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery: first clinical investigation.

Authors:  Jihad H Kaouk; Georges-Pascal Haber; Riccardo Autorino; Sebastien Crouzet; Adil Ouzzane; Vincent Flamand; Arnauld Villers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Trends in robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients.

Authors:  M Francesca Monn; Clinton D Bahler; Eric B Schneider; Benjamin M Whittam; Rosalia Misseri; Richard C Rink; Chandru P Sundaram
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Work-related upper limb musculoskeletal disorders in paediatric laparoscopic surgery. A multicenter survey.

Authors:  Ciro Esposito; Alaa El Ghoneimi; Atsuyuki Yamataka; Steve Rothenberg; Marcela Bailez; Marcelo Ferro; Piergiorgio Gamba; Marco Castagnetti; Girolamo Mattioli; Pascale Delagausie; Dimitris Antoniou; Philippe Montupet; Antonio Marte; Amulya Saxena; Mirko Bertozzi; Paul Philippe; François Varlet; Hubert Lardy; Antony Caldamone; Alessandro Settimi; Gloria Pelizzo; Francois Becmeur; Maria Escolino; Teresa De Pascale; Azad Najmaldin; Felix Schier
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 2.545

View more
  5 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for pediatric tumors: a bicenter experience.

Authors:  P Meignan; Q Ballouhey; J Lejeune; K Braik; B Longis; A R Cook; H Lardy; L Fourcade; Aurélien Binet
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-12-29

Review 2.  Global trends in paediatric robot-assisted urological surgery: a bibliometric and Progressive Scholarly Acceptance analysis.

Authors:  Thomas P Cundy; Simon J D Harley; Hani J Marcus; Archie Hughes-Hallett; Sanjeev Khurana
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-04-28

3.  Pediatric and adolescent gynecology: Treatment perspectives in minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Gloria Pelizzo; Ghassan Nakib; Valeria Calcaterra
Journal:  Pediatr Rep       Date:  2019-12-02

4.  Ten years of paediatric robotic surgery: Lessons learned.

Authors:  Martin Salö; Linda Bonnor; Christina Graneli; Pernilla Stenström; Magnus Anderberg
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 2.483

Review 5.  Robotic surgery in pediatric urology.

Authors:  Adam Howe; Zachary Kozel; Lane Palmer
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2016-09-06
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.