Advertisement

The 100 most influential manuscripts in robotic surgery: a bibliometric analysis

  • Tara M. ConnellyEmail author
  • Zoya Malik
  • Rishabh Sehgal
  • Gerrard Byrnes
  • J. Calvin Coffey
  • Colin Peirce
Original Article
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

Since the first robotic assisted surgery in 1985, the number of procedures performed annually has steadily increased. Bibliometric analysis highlights the key studies that have influenced current practice in a field of interest. We use bibliometric analysis to evaluate the 100 most cited manuscripts on robotic surgery and discuss their content and influence on the evolution of the platform. The terms ‘robotic surgery,’ ‘robot assisted surgery’ and ‘robot-assisted surgery’ were used to search Thomson Reuters Web of Science database for full length, English language manuscripts. The top 100 cited manuscripts were analyzed by manuscript type, surgical specialty, first and last author, institution, year and journal of publication. 14,980 manuscripts were returned. Within the top 100 cited manuscripts, the majority featured urological surgery (n = 28), followed by combined results from multiple surgical subspecialties (n = 15) and colorectal surgery (n = 13). The majority of manuscripts featured case series/reports (n = 42), followed by comparative studies (n = 24). The most cited paper authored by Nelson et al. (432 citations) reviewed technological advances in the field. The year and country with the greatest number of publications were 2009 (n = 15) and the USA (n = 68). The Johns Hopkins University published the most top 100 manuscripts (n = 18). The 100 most cited manuscripts reflect the progression of robotic surgery from a basic instrument-holding platform to today’s articulated instruments with 3D technology. From feasibility studies to multicenter trials, this analysis demonstrates how robotic assisted surgery has gained acceptance in urological, colorectal, general, cardiothoracic, orthopedic, maxillofacial and neuro surgery.

Keywords

Robotic surgery Robot-assisted surgery Bibliometric analysis 

Notes

Funding

No funding was used for this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Drs. Tara M. Connelly, Zoya Malik, Rishabh Seghal, Gerrard Byrnes, J Calvin Coffey and Colin Peirce declare that he/she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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

References

  1. 1.
    Alemzadeh H, Raman J, Leveson N, Kalbarczyk Z, Iyer RK (2016) Adverse events in robotic surgery: a retrospective study of 14 years of FDA data. PLoS One 11:e0151470CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pugin F, Bucher P, Morel P (2011) History of robotic surgery: from AESOP(R) and ZEUS(R) to da Vinci(R). J Visc Surg 148:e3–e8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring—review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 16:1389–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Loonen MP, Hage JJ, Kon M (2008) Plastic surgery classics: characteristics of 50 top-cited articles in four plastic surgery journals since 1946. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:320e–327eCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dubin D, Hafner AW, Arndt KA (1993) Citation classics in clinical dermatologic journals. Citation analysis, biomedical journals, and landmark articles, 1945–1990. Arch Dermatol 129:1121–1129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paladugu R, Schein M, Gardezi S, Wise L (2002) One hundred citation classics in general surgical journals. World J Surg 26:1099–1105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kelly JC, Glynn RW, O’Briain DE, Felle P, McCabe JP (2010) The 100 classic papers of orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:1338–1343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joyce CW, Kelly JC, Sugrue C (2014) A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most influential papers in burns. Burns 40:30–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kavanagh RG, Kelly JC, Kelly PM, Moore DP (2013) The 100 classic papers of pediatric orthopaedic surgery: a bibliometric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg 95:e134 (American volume) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Taylor RH, Stoianovici D (2003) Medical robotics in computer-integrated surgery. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 19:765–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Drake JM, Joy M, Goldenberg A, Kreindler D (1991) Computer- and robot-assisted resection of thalamic astrocytomas in children. Neurosurgery 29:27–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, Geller DA et al (2015) Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka. Ann Surg 261:619–629PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor RH, Paul HA, Hanson W et al (1994) An image-directed robotic system for precise orthopaedic surgery. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 10:261–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sung GT, Gill IS (2001) Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the DA Vinci and Zeus systems. Urology 58:893–898CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Montorsi F, Wilson TG, Rosen RC et al (2012) Best practices in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol 62:368–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R et al (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 62:1023–1033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tewari A, Sooriakumaran P, Bloch DA (2012) Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:1–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nifong LW, Chitwood WR, Pappas PS et al (2005) Robotic mitral valve surgery: a United States multicenter trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129:1395–1404CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A et al (2010) Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17:1614–1620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr, Magnuson JS et al (2012) Transoral robotic surgery: a multicenter study to assess feasibility, safety, and surgical margins. Laryngoscope 122:1701–1707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kavoussi LR, Moore RG, Adams JB et al (1995) Comparison of robotic versus human laparoscopic camera control. J Urol 154:2134–2136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lenihan J, Kovanda C, Seshadri-Kreaden U (2008) What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:589–594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bokhari MB, Patel CB, Ramos-Valadez DI et al (2011) Learning curve for roboticassisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 25:855–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Seglen PO (1997) Citations and journal impact factors: questionable indicators of research quality. Allergy 52:1050–1056CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M et al (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg 138:777–784CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M et al (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92:205–210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Menon M, Shrivastava A, Sarle R et al (2003) Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: a single-team experience of 100 cases. J Endourol 17:785–790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    O’Malley BW, Weinstein GS, Snyder W et al (2006) Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for base of tongue neoplasms. Laryngoscope 116:1465–1472CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG et al (2009) Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol 182:866–872CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A et al (2003) Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int 92:232–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW, Snyder W et al (2007) Transoral robotic surgery: radical tonsillectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 133:1220–1226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    DiGioia AM, Jaramaz B, Colgan BD (1998) Computer assisted orthopaedic surgery—image guided and robotic assistive technologies. Clin Orthop Relat Res 354:8–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M (2007) Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer 110:1951–1958CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Novara G et al (2007) Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 51:45–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cadière GB, Himpens J, Germay O et al (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25:1467–1477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nix J, Smith A, Kurpad R et al (2010) Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol 57:196–201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Loulmet D, Carpentier A, d’Attellis N et al (1999) Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting with the aid of robotic assisted instruments. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 118:4–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK et al (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: technique and initial clinical experience with DaVinci robotic system. Urology 64:914–918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Taylor R, Jensen P, Whitcomb L et al (1999) A steady-hand robotic system for microsurgical augmentation. Int J Robot Res 18:1201–1210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS et al (2009) Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1480–1487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mohr FW, Falk V, Diegeler A et al (2001) Computer-enhanced ‘robotic’ cardiac cardiac surgery: experience in 148 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 121:842–853CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN et al (2013) Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologicdisease. JAMA 309:689–698CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kang SW, Lee SC, Lee SH et al (2009) Robotic thyroid surgery using a gasless, transaxillary approach and the da Vinci S system: the operative outcomes of 338 consecutive patients. Surgery 146:1048–1055CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sackier JM and WangY (1994) Robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery. From concept to development. Surg Endosc. 1994 Jan;8(1):63-6Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mack MJ (2001) Minimally invasive and robotic surgery. JAMA 285:568–572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V et al (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2162–2168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL et al (2008) Robotic radical hysteretomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 109:86–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nguyen PL, Gu X, Lipsitz SR et al (2011) Cost implications of the rapid adoption of newer technologies for treating prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 29:1517–1524CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr, Snyder W et al (2007) Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic partial laryngectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 116:19–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L et al (2001) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot. J Urol 165:1964–1966CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lee RS, Retik AB, Borer JG et al (2006) Pediatric robot assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: comparison with a cohort of open surgery. J Urol 175:683–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A et al (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Benway BM, Wang AJ, Cabello JM et al (2009) Robotic partial nephrectomy with sliding-clip renorrhaphy: technique and outcomes. Eur Urol 55:592–599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Okamura AM (2004) Methods for haptic feedback in teleoperated robot-assisted surgery. Ind Robot 31:499–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ et al (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A et al (2011) Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 118:1005–1013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Yun JS et al (2009) Robot-assisted endoscopic surgery for thyroid cancer: experience with the first 100 patients. Surg Endosc 2:2399–2406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP et al (2009) Robotic single-port transumbilical surgery in humans: initial report. BJU Int 103:366–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Okamura AM (2009) Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Curr Opin Urol 19:102–107CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Talamini MA, Chapman S, Horgan S et al (2003) A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 17:1521–1524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH et al (2006) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20:1521–1525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Moore EJ, Olsen KD, Kasperbauer JL (2009) Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective study of feasiblity and functional outcomes. Laryngoscope 119:2156–2164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Falk V, Diegeler A, Walther T et al (2000) Total endoscopic computer enhanced coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 17:38–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Krambeck AE, DiMarco DS, Rangel LJ et al (2009) Radical prostectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubicand robotassisted techniques. BJU Int 103:448–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH et al (2009) Robot- assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: lessons learned from an intial 100 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 249:927–932CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA et al (2010) Efficacy of the Da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252:254–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Gill IS, Eisenberg MS, Aron M et al (2011) “Zero ischemia” partial nephrectomy: novel laparoscopic and robotic technique. Eur Urol 59:128–134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Peirs J, Clijnen J, Reynaerts D et al (2004) A micro optical force sensor for force feedback during minimally invasive robotic surgery. Sens Actuators A 115:447–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Seamon LG, Cohn DE, Henretta MS et al (2009) Miniamally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: robotics or laparoscopy? Gynecol Oncol 113:36–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Tholey G, Desai JP, Castellanos AE (2005) Force feedback plays a significant role in minimally invasive surgery: results and analysis. Ann Surg 241:102–109PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM et al (2008) Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 112:1201–1206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Horgan S, Vanuno D (2001) Robots in laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 11:415–419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Bodner J, Wykypiel H, Wetscher G et al (2004) First experiences with the da Vinci operating robot in thoracic surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 25:844–851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gehrig PA, Cantrell LA, Shafer A et al (2008) What is the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obsese woman? Gynecol Oncol 111:41–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Baik SH, Ko YT, Kang CM et al (2008) Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilotrandomized trial. Surg Endosc 22:1601–1608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Wang AJ, Bhayani SB (2009) Robotic partial nephretomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: single-surgeon analysis of > 100 consecutive procedures. Urology 73:306–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Hassfeld S, Mühling J (2001) Computer assisted oral and maxillofacial surgery-a review and assessment of technology. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 30(1):2–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Rogers CG, Singh A, Blatt AM et al (2008) Robotic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors: surgical technique. Eur Urol 53:514–521CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Genden EM, Desai S, Sung CK (2009) Transoral robotic surgery for the management of head and neck cancer: a preliminaryexperience. Head Neck 31:283–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA et al (2007) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: functional and pathologic outcomes with interfascial nerve preservation. Eur Urol 51:755–762CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D et al (2006) Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy –critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 49:612–624CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Hanly EJ, Talamini MA (2004) Robotic abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 188:19S26SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Davies B (2000) A review of robotics in surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 214:129–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Mottrie A, De Naeyer G, Schatteman P et al (2010) Impact of the learning curve on perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent roboticpartial nephrectomy for parenchymal renal tumours. Eur Urol 58:127–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR et al (2012) Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol 187:1392–1398CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Menon M, Kaul S, Bhandari A et al (2005) Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: a questionnaire based analysis of outcomes after conventional nerve sparing and prostatic fascia sparing techniques. J Urol 174:2291–2296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Kitagawa M, Dokko D, Okamura AM et al (2005) Effect of sensory substitution on suture-manipulation forces for robotic surgical systems. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129:151–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Howe RD, Matsuoka Y (1999) Robotics for surgery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 1:211–240CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Simaan N, Xu K, Kapoor A et al (2009) Design and integration of a telerobotic telerobotic system for minimally invasive surgery of the throat. Int J Rob Res 1:1134–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Ballantyne GH, Moll F (2003) The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery. Surg Clin North Am 83:1293–1304CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    van der Meijden OA, Schijven MP (2009) The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc 23:1180–1190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr, Cohen MA et al (2010) Transoral robotic surgery for advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 136:1079–1085CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Hellan M, Anderson C, Ellenhorn JD et al (2007) Short-term outcomes after roboticassisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 14:3168–3173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY et al (2012) A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 19:2485–2493CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK et al (2006) Positive surgical margins in roboticassisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 49:866–871CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Camarillo DB, Krummel TM, Salisbury JK Jr (2004) Robotic technology in surgery: past, present, and future. Am J Surg 188:2S–15SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Shoham M, Burman M, Zehavi E et al (2003) Bone-mounted miniature robot for surgical procedures: concept and clinical applications. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 19:893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D et al (2005) Advantages and limits of robotassisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc 19:117–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Scales CD Jr, Jones PJ, Eisenstein EL et al (2005) Local cost structures and the economics of robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 174(6):2323–2329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Spinoglio G, Summa M, Priora F et al (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–32104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Moorthy K, Munz Y, Dosis A et al (2004) Dexterity enhancement with robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 18:790–795PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Pasticier G, Rietbergen JB, Guillonneau B et al (2001) Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol 40:70–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Nelson B, Kaufman M, Broughton G et al (2007) Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol 177:929–931CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS et al (2013) Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg 257:128–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Aron M, Koenig P, Kaouk JH et al (2008) Robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair comparison from a high-volume centre. BJU Int 102:86–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Kaul S, Laungani R, Sarle R et al (2007) da Vinci-assisted robotic partial nephrectomy: technique and results at a mean of 15 months of follow-up. Eur Urol 51:186–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tara M. Connelly
    • 1
    Email author
  • Zoya Malik
    • 1
  • Rishabh Sehgal
    • 1
  • Gerrard Byrnes
    • 1
  • J. Calvin Coffey
    • 1
    • 2
  • Colin Peirce
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Colorectal SurgeryUniversity Hospital LimerickLimerickIreland
  2. 2.Graduate Entry Medical SchoolUniversity of LimerickLimerickIreland

Personalised recommendations