Literature DB >> 32078114

From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot.

Emma M van der Schans1,2, Marijn A J Hiep3, Esther C J Consten4,5, Ivo A M J Broeders4,3.   

Abstract

Robot-assisted surgery is assumed to be time consuming partially due to extra time needed in preparing the robot. The objective of this study was to give realistic times in Da Vinci Xi draping and docking and to analyse the learning curve in the transition from the Si to the Xi in an experienced team. This prospective study was held in a hospital with a high volume of robot-assisted surgery in general surgery, urology and gynaecology. Times from the moment patients entered the operating room until the surgeon took place behind console were precisely recorded during the first 6 weeks after the implementation of the Xi. In total, 65 procedures were performed and documented. The learning curve for the process of draping and docking the robot was reached after 21 and 18 cases, respectively. Mean times after completion of the learning curve were 5 min for draping and 7 min for docking and were statistically different from mean times before completion of the learning curve (p values < 0.01). In dedicated teams netto extra time needed for preparing the Xi can even be reduced to just the time needed for docking. Thus, setting up the robot should have limited impact on overall time spent in the operation room.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Docking; Draping; Learning curve; Robot-assisted surgery; Time efficiency

Year:  2020        PMID: 32078114     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-020-01057-8

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


  7 in total

1.  Enhancing robotic efficiency through the eyes of robotic surgeons: sub-analysis of the expertise in perception during robotic surgery (ExPeRtS) study.

Authors:  Courtney A Green; Joseph A Lin; Emily Huang; Patricia O'Sullivan; Rana M Higgins
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Comment on: oncologic outcomes after robotic pancreatic resections are not inferior to open surgery.

Authors:  Antonio Mimmo; Tullio Piardi
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 7.293

Review 3.  Robotic Transanal Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  John H Marks; Rafael E Perez; Jean F Salem
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2021-09-09

Review 4.  The Senhance Surgical System in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Tyler McKechnie; Jigish Khamar; Ryan Daniel; Yung Lee; Lily Park; Aristithes G Doumouras; Dennis Hong; Mohit Bhandari; Cagla Eskicioglu
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-09-21

5.  Predictors of the cost of hysterectomy for benign indications.

Authors:  Abdelrahman AlAshqar; Metin E Goktepe; Gokhan S Kilic; Mostafa A Borahay
Journal:  J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod       Date:  2020-10-09

6.  Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients.

Authors:  Pedja Cuk; Randi Maria Simonsen; Mirjana Komljen; Michael Festersen Nielsen; Per Helligsø; Andreas Kristian Pedersen; Christian Backer Mogensen; Mark Bremholm Ellebæk
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-05-22       Impact factor: 2.754

7.  A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Kun-Yang Lei; Wen-Jie Xie; Sheng-Qiang Fu; Ming Ma; Ting Sun
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.