Literature DB >> 27637540

Setting up robotic surgery in gynaecology: the experience of the Strasbourg teaching hospital.

N Sananès1, O Garbin2, M Hummel2, C Youssef3, R Vizitiu2, D Lemaho2, D Rottenberg2, P Diemunsch3, A Wattiez3.   

Abstract

Teleoperated surgical robots could provide a genuine breakthrough in laparoscopy and it is for this reason that the development of robot-assisted laparoscopy is one of the priorities of the Strasbourg University Hospitals' strategic plan. The hospitals purchased a da Vinci S(®) robot in June 2006 and Strasbourg has, in IRCAD, one of the few robotic surgery training centres in the world. Our experience has, however, revealed the difficulties involved in setting up robotic surgery, the first of which are organizational issues. This prospective work was carried out between December 2007 and September 2008, primarily to examine the possibility of setting up robotic surgery on a regular basis for gynaecological surgical procedures at the Strasbourg University Hospitals. We maintained a "logbook" in which we prospectively noted all the resources implemented in setting up the robotic surgery service. The project was divided into two phases: the preparatory phase up until the first hysterectomy and then the second phase with the organization of subsequent hysterectomies. The first surgical procedure took 5 months to organize, and followed 25 interviews, 10 meetings, 53 telephone conversations and 48 e-mails with a total of 40 correspondents. The project was presented to seven separate groups, including the hospital medical commission, the gynaecology unit committee and the surgical staff. Fifteen members of the medical and paramedical team attended a two-day training course. Preparing the gynaecology department for robotic surgery required freeing up 8.5 days of "physician time" and 12.5 days of "nurse time". In the following five months, we performed five hysterectomies. Preparation for each procedure involved on average 5 interviews, 19 telephone conversations and 11 e-mails. The biggest obstacle was obtaining an operating slot, as on average it required 18 days, four telephone calls and four e-mails to be assigned a slot in the operating theatre schedule, which is prepared on average 28 days in advance. It is extremely important for organising robotic surgery and assembling the surgical teams to have a series of operating slots allocated a sufficiently long time in advance. Considerable benefits would be had by setting up a team of anaesthetists and especially perioperative nurses dedicated to robotic surgery.

Keywords:  Gynecology; Hysterectomy; Robotic surgery; Set-up

Year:  2011        PMID: 27637540     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-010-0231-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  Switching robotic surgical systems does not impact surgical performance.

Authors:  Mohamed R Ali; Jason J Rasmussen
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.878

3.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery with the da Vinci system: a 4-year experience in a single institution.

Authors:  Chris Braumann; Christoph A Jacobi; Charalambos Menenakos; Mahmoud Ismail; Jens C Rueckert; Joachim M Mueller
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.719

4.  Robotic-assisted gynaecological surgery-establishing training criteria; minimizing operative time and blood loss.

Authors:  Michael C Pitter; Patrick Anderson; Amelia Blissett; Nicola Pemberton
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.547

5.  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

6.  Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study.

Authors:  M Degueldre; J Vandromme; P T Huong; G B Cadière
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs.

Authors:  Arnold P Advincula; Xiao Xu; Suntrea Goudeau; Scott B Ransom
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.137

8.  Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy.

Authors:  Javier F Magrina; Rosanne M Kho; Amy L Weaver; Regina P Montero; Paul M Magtibay
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice.

Authors:  Thomas N Payne; Francis R Dauterive
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 4.137

  9 in total
  1 in total

1.  Recommendations for a standardised educational program in robot assisted gynaecological surgery: Consensus from the Society of European Robotic Gynaecological Surgery (SERGS).

Authors:  P Rusch; T Ind; R Kimmig; A Maggioni; J Ponce; V Zanagnolo; P J Coronado; J Verguts; E Lambaudie; H Falconer; J W Collins; Rhm Verheijen
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2019-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.