Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assistance by adaptative damping on a complex bimanual task in laparoscopic surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery has improved outcomes in abdominal surgery, but presents kinematic restrictions for surgeons. Robotic comanipulation with adaptative damping has been investigated in simple laparoscopic tasks. The present protocol aimed to determine the contribution of adaptive damping in complex bimanual tasks approaching clinical setting.

Methods

Fourteen residents in general surgery performed three exercises, and for each three repetitions without (classic repetitions) and three with robotic assistance (robotic repetitions) in a randomised order. The exercises chosen were trajectory, modified Pea on a Peg and intracorporeal suture. Task performance, gesture performance, workload and impression were measured. Also, a semi-directed interview was performed to collect the participants’ feeling about companipulated robots and their potential application in clinical practice.

Results

Adaptative damping assistance did not impact task performance, but allowed an economy of movement in the non-dominant hand during suture exercise (distance 916 ± 500 mm in classic vs. 563 ± 261 mm in robotic, p < 0.001). Perceived workload (p = 0.12) and user’s impression were not different between classic and robotic repetitions, except novelty (p < 0.001). Participants’ interviews revealed their interest for the robotic devices, particularly the gravity compensation, and were ready to use the adaptative damping provided an intermittent use, for example to dissect dangerous areas.

Conclusion

Adaptative damping applied by comanipulated robots does not influence the performance of the task, but improves the performance of the gesture itself, particularly for the non-dominant hand, and during the realisation of a complex task like suturing. For residents in digestive surgery, this assistance does increase workload, and they would use this help in the operating room under certain conditions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pucher PH, Mackenzie H, Tucker V, Mercer SJ (2021) A national propensity score-matched analysis of emergency laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 108:934–940. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab048

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Wu S-Y, Ho M-H, Chang H-M, Hsu K-F, Yu J-C, Chan D-C (2021) Long-term oncologic result of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis. World J Surg Oncol 19:101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-021-02217-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Crothers IR, Gallagher AG, McClure N, James DT, McGuigan J (1999) Experienced laparoscopic surgeons are automated to the “fulcrum effect”: an ergonomic demonstration. Endoscopy 31:365–369. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-1999-26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dharia SP, Falcone T (2005) Robotics in reproductive medicine. Fertil Steril 84:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Reitano E, de’Angelis N, Schembari E, Carrà MC, Francone E, Gentilli S, La Greca G (2021) Learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy has not been defined: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg 91:E554–E560. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.17021

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Cuk P, Simonsen RM, Komljen M, Nielsen MF, Helligsø P, Pedersen AK, Mogensen CB, Ellebæk MB (2021) Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients. World J Surg Oncol 19:155. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-021-02263-w

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Khan JS, Ahmad A, Odermatt M, Jayne DG, Ahmad NZ, Kandala N, West NP (2021) Robotic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for right colonic tumours: a propensity score-matching study comparing with standard laparoscopy. BJS Open 5:zrab016. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab016

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Blavier A, Gaudissart Q, Cadière G-B, Nyssen A-S (2007) Perceptual and instrumental impacts of robotic laparoscopy on surgical performance. Surg Endosc 21:1875–1882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9342-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. I Avellino, G Bailly, G Canlorbe, J Belghiti, G Morel, et al Impacts of telemanipulation in robotic assisted surgery. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems

  10. Troccaz J (2013) Medical robotics. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Mitchell B, Koo J, Iordachita I, Kazanzides P, Kapoor A, Handa J, Hager G, Taylor R (2007) Development and application of a new steady-hand manipulator for retinal surgery. In: Proceedings 2007 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. pp 623–629

  12. Dong L, Perrin N, Richer F, Roby-Brami A, Morel G (2022) The stability investigation of variable viscosity control in the human-robot interaction. Int J Med Robot 18:e2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2416

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ikeura R, Inooka H (1995) Variable impedance control of a robot for cooperation with a human. In: Proceedings of 1995 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. pp 3097–3102, vol 3

  14. Nassar A, Vérité F, Pechereau F, Morel G, Vitrani M-A (2023) Adaptative damping assistance in bimanual laparoscopic surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 18:741–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-022-02796-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Powers TW, Bentrem DJ, Nagle AP, Toyama MT, Murphy SA, Murayama KM (2005) Hand dominance and performance in a laparoscopic skills curriculum. Surg Endosc 19:673–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8290-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schreuder HWR, van den Berg CB, Hazebroek EJ, Verheijen RHM, Schijven MP (2011) Laparoscopic skills training using inexpensive box trainers: which exercises to choose when constructing a validated training course. BJOG 118:1576–1584. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03146.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ritter EM, Scott DJ (2007) Design of a proficiency-based skills training curriculum for the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surg Innov 14:107–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350607302329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Montoya-Alvarez S, Minor-Martínez A, Ordorica-Flores RM, Padilla-Sánchez L, Tapia-Jurado J, Pérez-Escamirosa F (2020) Construct validity of the SurgForce system for objective assessment of laparoscopic suturing skills. Surg Endosc 34:5188–5199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07873-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Soper NJ, Hunter JG (1992) Suturing and knot tying in laparoscopy. Surg Clin North Am 72:1139–1152. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0039-6109(16)45837-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Borahay MA, Haver MC, Eastham B, Patel PR, Kilic GS (2013) Modular comparison of laparoscopic and robotic simulation platforms in residency training: a randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20:871–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2013.06.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Akand M, Altintas E, Kilic O, Gul M, Erdogdu MB Does previous video game experience affect laparoscopic skills? Evaluation of non-medical school students with a novel laparoscopic training box

  22. Derossis AM, Fried GM, Abrahamowicz M, Sigman HH, Barkun JS, Meakins JL (1998) Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg 175:482–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9610(98)00080-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fraser SA, Klassen DR, Feldman LS, Ghitulescu GA, Stanbridge D, Fried GM (2003) Evaluating laparoscopic skills: setting the pass/fail score for the MISTELS system. Surg Endosc 17:964–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8828-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Marinetto E, García-Mato D, GarcíA A, Martínez S, Desco M, Pascau J (2018) Multicamera optical tracker assessment for computer aided surgery applications. IEEE Access 6:64359–64370. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2878323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Oropesa I, Chmarra MK, Sánchez-González P, Lamata P, Rodrigues SP, Enciso S, Sánchez-Margallo FM, Jansen F-W, Dankelman J, Gómez EJ (2013) Relevance of motion-related assessment metrics in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Innov 20:299–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350612459808

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hart SG (2006) Nasa-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 50:904–908. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605000909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schrepp M, Hinderks A, Thomaschewski J (2014) Applying the user experience questionnaire (UEQ) in different evaluation scenarios. In: Marcus A (ed) Design, user experience, and usability. Theories, methods, and tools for designing the user experience. Springer, Cham, pp 383–392

  28. Tsumugiwa T, Yokogawa R, Hara K (2002) Variable impedance control based on estimation of human arm stiffness for human-robot cooperative calligraphic task. In: Proceedings 2002 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (Cat. No.02CH37292). pp 644–650, vol 1

  29. Nieboer TE, Sari V, Kluivers KB, Weinans MJN, Vierhout ME, Stegeman DF (2012) A randomized trial of training the non-dominant upper extremity to enhance laparoscopic performance. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 21:259–264. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645706.2011.614256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sutter C, Sülzenbrück S, Rieger M, Müsseler J (2013) Limitations of distal effect anticipation when using tools. New Ideas Psychol 31:247–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2012.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Flash T, Hogan N (1985) The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model. J Neurosci 5:1688–1703. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.05-07-01688.1985

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Erden MS, Marić B (2011) Assisting manual welding with robot. Robot Comput-Integr Manuf 27:818–828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2011.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ruurda JP, Visser PL, Broeders IAMJ (2003) Analysis of procedure time in robot-assisted surgery: comparative study in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comput Aided Surg 8:24–29. https://doi.org/10.3109/10929080309146099

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, Sorbonne Universités, 4, Place Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France

    A. Nassar, F. Vérité, F. Pechereau & M. A. Vitrani

Authors
  1. A. Nassar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Vérité
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. Pechereau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. A. Vitrani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by AN, FP and FV. The first draft of the manuscript was written by AN, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Nassar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nassar, A., Vérité, F., Pechereau, F. et al. Assistance by adaptative damping on a complex bimanual task in laparoscopic surgery. Int J CARS (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-024-03082-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-024-03082-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation