Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of KangDuo-SR-1500 and KangDuo-SR-2000 robotic partial nephrectomy from an operative and ergonomic perspective: a prospective controlled study in porcine models

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study is to explore the safety and effectiveness of two new models of KangDuo surgical robots for partial nephrectomy in porcine models, and evaluate the ergonomic characteristics from both subjective and objective perspectives. Twelve porcine models were equally divided for KD-SR-1500 (three-arm) and KD-SR-2000 (four-arm). The perioperative outcomes, and physical and mental workload of the surgeon were compared. Physical workload was evaluated with surface electromyography. Mental workload was evaluated with NASA-TLX. All surgeries were performed successfully. There were no differences in perioperative variables (p > 0.05). There were no perioperative complications. The mental workload in both groups was at a low level. KD-SR-2000 showed advantages in physical workload (p < 0.01). KD-SR-1500 and KD-SR-2000 are technically feasible, valid, and safe for RAPN in porcine models. KD-SR-2000 had ergonomic advantages over KD-SR-1500.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

KD:

KangDuo

NASA-TLX:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index

LPN:

Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy

RAPN:

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

WIT:

Warm ischemic time

sEMG:

Surface electromyography

DV:

Da Vinci Si

iEMG:

Integrated EMG

MPF:

Mean power frequency

References

  1. Pasticier G, Rietbergen JB, Guillonneau B, Fromont G, Menon M, Vallancien G (2001) Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol 40(1):70–74. https://doi.org/10.1159/000049751

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pierorazio PM, Patel HD, Feng T, Yohannan J, Hyams ES, Allaf ME (2011) Robotic-assisted versus traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison of outcomes and evaluation of learning curve. Urology 78(4):813–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Porpiglia F, Volpe A, Billia M, Scarpa RM. Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy: analysis of the current literature. Eur Urol. 2008;53(4):732–42; discussion 742–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.01.025

  4. Hanzly M, Frederick A, Creighton T, Atwood K, Mehedint D, Kauffman EC, Kim HL, Schwaab T (2015) Learning curves for robot-assisted and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 29(3):297–303. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Choi JE, You JH, Kim DK, Rha KH, Lee SH (2015) Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67(5):891–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chow AK, Wong R, Monda S, Bhatt R, Sands KG, Vetter J, Badhiwala N, DeClue A, Kim EH, Sivaraman A, Venkatesh R, Figenshau RS, Du K (2021) Ex vivo porcine model for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy simulation at a high-volume tertiary center: resident perception and validation assessment using the global evaluative assessment of robotic skills tool. J Endourol 35(6):878–884. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2020.0590

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cheung H, Wang Y, Chang SL, Khandwala Y, Del Giudice F, Chung BI (2017) Adoption of robot-assisted partial nephrectomies: a population-based analysis of US surgeons from 2004 to 2013. J Endourol 31(9):886–892. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dalager T, Søgaard K, Bech KT, Mogensen O, Jensen PT (2017) Musculoskeletal pain among surgeons performing minimally invasive surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 31(2):516–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5020-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee GI, Lee MR, Green I, Allaf M, Marohn MR (2017) Surgeons’ physical discomfort and symptoms during robotic surgery: a comprehensive ergonomic survey study. Surg Endosc 31(4):1697–1706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5160-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Patel E, Saikali S, Mascarenhas A, Moschovas MC, Patel V (2023) Muscle fatigue and physical discomfort reported by surgeons performing robotic-assisted surgery: a multinational survey. J Robot Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01608-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee GI, Lee MR, Clanton T, Sutton E, Park AE, Marohn MR. Comparative assessment of physical and cognitive ergonomics associated with robotic and traditional laparoscopic surgeries. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(2):456–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3213-z. Epub 2013. Erratum in: Surg Endosc. 2015;29(3):753. Clanton, Tamera [corrected to Clanton, Tameka]

  12. Mikhail D, Sarcona J, Mekhail M, Richstone L (2020) Urologic robotic surgery. Surg Clin North Am 100(2):361–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2019.12.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alip SL, Kim J, Rha KH, Han WK (2022) Future platforms of robotic surgery. Urol Clin North Am 49(1):23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2021.07.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Li X, Xu W, Fan S, Xiong S, Dong J, Wang J, Dai X, Yang K, Xie Y, Liu G, Meng C, Zhang Z, Cai L, Zhang C, Zhang Z, Ji Z, Shen C, Zhou L (2023) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with the newly developed KangDuo surgical robot versus the da Vinci Si surgical system: a double-center prospective randomized controlled noninferiority trial. Eur Urol Focus 9(1):133–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.07.008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fan S, Xiong S, Li Z et al (2022) Pyeloplasty with the Kangduo surgical robot vs the da Vinci Si robotic system: preliminary results. J Endourol 36(12):1538–1544. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2022.0366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dai X, Fan S, Hao H, Yang K, Shen C, Xiong G, Li X, Cui L, Li X, Zhou L (2021) Comparison of KD-SR-01 robotic partial nephrectomy and 3D-laparoscopic partial nephrectomy from an operative and ergonomic perspective: A prospective randomized controlled study in porcine models. Int J Med Robot. 17(2):e2187. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zihni AM, Cavallo JA, Ray S, Ohu I, Cho S, Awad MM (2016) Ergonomic analysis of primary and assistant surgical roles. J Surg Res 203(2):301–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.03.058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Carswell CM, Clarke D, Seales WB (2005) Assessing mental workload during laparoscopic surgery. Surg Innov 12(1):80–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/155335060501200112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bolenz C, Gupta A, Hotze T, Ho R, Cadeddu JA, Roehrborn CG, Lotan Y (2010) Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 57(3):453–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.11.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fanfani F, Monterossi G, Fagotti A, Rossitto C, Gueli Alletti S, Costantini B, Gallotta V, Selvaggi L, Restaino S, Scambia G (2016) The new robotic TELELAP ALF-X in gynecological surgery: single-center experience. Surg Endosc 30(1):215–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4187-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yao Y, Liu Y, Li Z, Yi B, Wang G, Zhu S (2020) Chinese surgical robot micro hand S: a consecutive case series in general surgery. Int J Surg 75:55–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.01.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Koukourikis P, Rha KH (2021) Robotic surgical systems in urology: what is currently available? Investig Clin Urol 62(1):14–22. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20200387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim DK, Park DW, Rha KH (2016) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with the REVO-I robot platform in porcine models. Eur Urol 69(3):541–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bozzini G, Gidaro S, Taverna G (2016) Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with the ALF-X robot on pig models. Eur Urol 69(2):376–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wells AC, Kjellman M, Harper SJF, Forsman M, Hallbeck MS (2019) Operating hurts: a study of EAES surgeons. Surg Endosc 33(3):933–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6574-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yang L, Wang T, Weidner TK, Madura JA 2nd, Morrow MM, Hallbeck MS (2021) Intraoperative musculoskeletal discomfort and risk for surgeons during open and laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 35(11):6335–6343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08085-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Berguer R, Rab GT, Abu-Ghaida H, Alarcon A, Chung J (1997) A comparison of surgeons’ posture during laparoscopic and open surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 11(2):139–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004649900316

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Sainan Zheng and Mei Han who helped in the preparation of this article.

Funding

None declared.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Liqing Xu and Xinfei Li have contributed equally to this paper.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China

    Liqing Xu, Xinfei Li, Shubo Fan, Zhihua Li, Wei Zuo, Silu Chen, Liqun Zhou, Kunlin Yang & Xuesong Li

  2. Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing, 100028, China

    Peng Zhang

  3. Department of Urology, School of Clinical Medicine, Civil Aviation General Hospital, Peking University Aerospace, Beijing, 100080, China

    Liang Cui

Authors
  1. Liqing Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xinfei Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shubo Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhihua Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wei Zuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Silu Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peng Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Liang Cui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Liqun Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kunlin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Xuesong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conception and design: XS Li and LQ Zhou. Supervision: XS Li and LQ Zhou. Surgery: XS Li, KL Yang, and P Zhang. Protocol: XS Li and L Cui. Data acquisition: LQ Xu, SL Chen, XF Li, W Zuo, ZH Li, and SB Fan. Data analysis and interpretation: LQ Xu, XF Li, and SB Fan. Drafting the manuscript: LQ Xu and XF Li. Critical revision of the manuscript for scientific and factual content: all authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Kunlin Yang or Xuesong Li.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Liqing Xu, Xinfei Li, Shubo Fan, Zhihua Li, Wei Zuo, Silu Chen, Peng Zhang, Liang Cui, Liqun Zhou, Kunlin Yang, and Xuesong Li have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee and written informed consent was obtained.

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

Xu, L., Li, X., Fan, S. et al. Analysis of KangDuo-SR-1500 and KangDuo-SR-2000 robotic partial nephrectomy from an operative and ergonomic perspective: a prospective controlled study in porcine models. J Robotic Surg 18, 26 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01770-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01770-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation