Telerobotic surgery for right and sigmoid colectomies: 30 consecutive cases

  • A. L. Rawlings
  • J. H. Woodland
  • D. L. Crawford
Article

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using a robotic assistant for colon resections. This report describes the experience, advantages, and disadvantages of using the DaVinci system for a colectomy on the basis of 30 consecutive cases managed by a minimally invasive surgery fellowship–trained surgeon.

Methods

Data were prospectively collected on 30 consecutive colectomies performed using the DaVinci system from September 2002 to March 2005.

Results

A total of 13 sigmoid colectomies with splenic flexure mobilization and 17 right colectomies were performed for 14 men and 16 women. The preoperative diagnoses for the procedures were cancer (n = 5), diverticulitis (n = 8), polyps (n = 16), and carcinoid (n = 1). The right colectomies required 29.7 ± 6.7 min (range, 22–44 min) for the port setup, 177.1 ± 50.6 min (range, 103–306 min) for the robot, and 218.9 ± 44.6 min (range, 167–340 min) for the total case. The length of stay was 5.2 ± 5.8 days (range, 2–27 days). The robot portion was 80.9% of the total case time. The sigmoid colectomies required 30.1 ± 9.6 min (range, 15–50 min) for the port setup, 103.2 ± 29.4 min (range, 69–165 min) for the robot, and 225.2 ± 37.1 min (range, 147–283 min) for the total case. The hospital length of stay was 6.0 ± 7.3 days (range, 3–30 days). The robot portion was 45.8% of the total case time. Six complications occurred: left hip paresthesia, cecal injury, anastomotic leak, patient slipped from the operating table after the robotic portion of the case, transverse colon injury, and return of a patient to the office with urinary retention. Two sigmoid colectomies were converted to laparotomy. The specific advantages and disadvantages of using the DaVinci system for colectomies are discussed.

Conclusions

The 30 consecutive cases demonstrated the technical feasibility of using the DaVinci system for a colectomy. The longevity of the DaVinci system’s use for colectomy will be determined by comparison of its cost and outcomes with those for conventional laparoscopic colectomy.

Keywords

DaVinci Right colectomy Robotic colectomy Sigmoid colectomy Telerobotics 

References

  1. 1.
    Anvari M, Birch D, Bamehriz F, Gryfe R, Chapman T (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14: 311–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ballantyne G, Moll F (2003) The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery. Surg Clin North Am 83: 1293–1304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bann S, Khan M, Hernandez J, Munz Y, Moorthy K, Datta V, Rockall T, Darzi A (2003) Robotics in surgery. J Am Coll Surg 196: 784–795PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braumann C, Jacobi C, Menenakos C, Borchert U, Rueckert J, Mueller J (2005) Computer-assisted laparoscopic colon resection with the DaVinci system: our first experiences. 48: 1820–1827Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cadiere G, Himpens J, Germay O, Izizaw R, Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Capelluto E, Bruyns J (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25: 1467–1477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V, Trevisan P, Sovernigo G, Orsini C, Guidolin D (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47: 2162–2168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Darzi S, Munz Y (2004) The impact of minimally invasive surgical techniques. Annu Rev Med 55: 223–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delaney C, Lynch A, Senagore A, Fazio V (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46: 1633–1639PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lau W, Leow C, Li A (1997) History of endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery. World J Surg 21: 444–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stylopoulos N, Rattner D (2003) Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am 83: 1321–1337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Talamini M, Campbell K, Stanfield C (2002) Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: early experience and system description. J Laparendosc Adv Surg Tech 12: 225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Talamini M, Chapman S, Horgan S, Melvin W (2003) A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 17: 1521–1524PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weber P, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne G (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45: 1689–1696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. L. Rawlings
    • 1
  • J. H. Woodland
    • 1
  • D. L. Crawford
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Illinois College of MedicinePeoriaUSA

Personalised recommendations