Skip to main content
Log in

Robot-assisted cholecystectomy with the new HUGO™ robotic-assisted system: first worldwide report with system description, docking settings, and video

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Robotic surgery has gained worldwide acceptance in the past decade, and several studies have shown that this technique is safe and feasible. The innovation of this system is the open surgical console with an HD–3D display, a system tower, and four independent arm carts. We describe the first robot-assisted cholecystectomy performed with the new Hugo RAS (robotic-assisted surgery) system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in Spain. The procedure was completed without conversion. No intraoperative complication or technical failure of the system was recorded. The operative time was 70 min. The docking time was 3 min. Hospital length of stay was 1 days. This case report shows the safety and feasibility of cholecystectomy with the Hugo RAS system and provides relevant data that may be of help to early adopters of this surgical platform.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Data availability

Data are available in an internal hospital database.

References

  1. Kirkham EN, Jones CS, Higginbotham G et al (2022) (2022) A systematic review of robot-assisted cholecystectomy to examine the quality of reporting in relation to the IDEAL recommendations: systematic review. BJS Open 6(5):zrac116

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Rao PP (2018) Robotic surgery: new robots and finally some real competition! World J Urol 36:537–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00345-018-2213-Y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gueli Alletti S, Chiantera V, Arcuri G et al (2022) Introducing the new surgical robot hugo™ ras: system description and docking settings for gynecological surgery. Front Oncol. https://doi.org/10.3389/FONC.2022.898060

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Larkins KM, Mohan HM, Gray M et al (2022) Transferability of robotic console skills by early robotic surgeons: a multi-platform crossover trial of simulation training. J Rob Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-022-01475-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Caruso R, Vicente E, Quijano Y, Duran H, Diaz E, Fabra I, Alfonsel JN, Malave L, Agresott R, Ferri V (2022) Case-matched analysis of robotic versus open surgical enucleation for pancreatic tumours: a comparative cost-effectiveness study. Int J Med Robot 18(5):e2425. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2425. (Epub 2022 May 28. PMID: 35596535)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Raffaelli M, Gallucci P, Voloudakis N et al (2023) The new robotic platform Hugo™ RAS for lateral transabdominal adrenalectomy: a first world report of a series of five cases. Updat Surg 75:217–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-022-01410-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Totaro A, Campetella M, Bientinesi R et al (2022) The new surgical robotic platform HUGO TM RAS: system description and docking settings for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urologia. https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603221107855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ragavan N, Bharathkumar S, Chirravur P et al (2022) Evaluation of Hugo RAS system in major urologic surgery: our initial experience. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/END.2022.0015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Karabis A, Nikolakopoulos S, Pandhi S et al (2016) High correlation of VAS pain scores after 2 and 6 weeks of treatment with VAS pain scores at 12 weeks in randomised controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis: meta-analysis and implications. Arthritis Res Ther 18:73. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-016-0972-7. (Published 2016 Mar 31)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Caruso R, Vicente E, Quijano Y, Ielpo B, Duran H, Diaz E, Fabra I, Ferri V (2019) Robotic assisted gastrectomy compared with open resection: a case-matched study. Updates Surg 71(2):367–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0533-5. (Epub 2018 May 4 PMID: 29728921)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Aguayo E, Dobaria V, Nakhla M et al (2020) National trends and outcomes of inpatient robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 168:625–630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Caruso.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical approval

This study was in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (MP4 374532 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vicente, E., Quijano, Y., Ferri, V. et al. Robot-assisted cholecystectomy with the new HUGO™ robotic-assisted system: first worldwide report with system description, docking settings, and video. Updates Surg 75, 2039–2042 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-023-01553-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-023-01553-0

Keywords

Navigation