Abstract
Background
In the last few years, robotics has been applied in clinical practice for a variety of laparoscopic procedures. This study reports our preliminary experience using robotics in the field of general surgery to evaluate the advantages and limitations of robot-assisted laparoscopy.
Methods
Thirty-two consecutive patients were scheduled to undergo robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in our units from March 2002 to July 2003. The indications were cholecystectomy, 20 patients; right adrenalectomy, two points; bilateral varicocelectomy, two points; Heller’s cardiomyotomy, two points; Nissen’s fundoplication, two points; total splenectomy, one point; right colectomy, one point; left colectomy, 1 point; and bilateral inguinal hernia repair, one point. In all cases, we used the da Vinci surgical system, with the surgeon at the robotic work station and an assistant by the operating table.
Results
Twenty-nine of 32 procedures (90.6%) were completed robotically, whereas three were converted to laparoscopic surgery. Conversion to laparoscopy was due in two patients to minor bleeding that could not be managed robotically and to robot malfunction in the third patient. There were no deaths. Median hospital stay was 2.2 days (range, 2–8).
Conclusions
The main advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery are the availability of three-dimensional vision and easier instrument manipulation than can be obtain with standard laparoscopy. The learning curve to master the robot was ≥ 10 robotic procedures. The main limitations are the large diameter of the instruments (8 mm) and the limited number of robotic arms (maximum, three). We consider these technical shortcomings to be the cause for our conversions, because it is difficult to manage bleeding episodes with only two operating instruments. The benefit to the patient must be evaluated carefully and proven before this technology can become widely accepted in general surgery.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
GH Ballantyne (2002) ArticleTitleRobotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring: review of early clinical results Surg Endosc 10 1389–1402 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00464-001-8283-7
GH Ballantyne F Moll (2003) ArticleTitleThe da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery Surg Clin North Am 6 1293–1304
GB Cadière J Himpens O Germay R Izizaw M Degueldre J Vandromme E Capelluto J Bruyns (2001) ArticleTitleFeasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases World J Surg 11 1467–1477
WH Chapman Suffix3rd RJ Albrecht VB Kim JA Young WR Chitwood SuffixJr (2002) ArticleTitleComputer-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy with the da Vinci surgical robot J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 3 155–159 Occurrence Handle10.1089/10926420260188038
PM Goh D Lomanto JB So (2002) ArticleTitleRobotic-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy Surg Endosc 1 216–217
JC Gould WS Melvin (2003) ArticleTitleTelerobotic foregut and esophageal surgery Surg Clin North Am 6 1421–1427
S Horgan D Vanuno (2001) ArticleTitleRobots in laparoscopic surgery J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 6 415–419 Occurrence Handle10.1089/10926420152761950
K Hourmont W Chung S Pereira A Wasielewski R Davies GH Ballantyne (2003) ArticleTitleRobotic versus telerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: duration of surgery and outcomes Surg Clin North Am 6 1445–1462
A Imme P Caglia L Gandolfo G Cavallaro M Donati C Amodeo (2002) ArticleTitleRobotic techniques in laparoscopic surgery Chir Ital 1 111–113
BP Jacob M Gagner (2003) ArticleTitleRobotics and general surgery Surg Clin North Am 6 1405–1419
VB Kim WH Chapman RJ Albrecht BM Bailey JA Young LW Nifong WR Chitwood SuffixJr (2002) ArticleTitleEarly experience with telemanipulative robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy using da Vinci Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12 33–40 Occurrence Handle12008760
J Marescaux J Leroy M Gagner F Rubino D Mutter M Vix SE Butner et al. (2001) ArticleTitleTransatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery Nature 13 710–714
J Marescaux MK Smith D Folscher F Jamali B Malassagne J Leroy (2002) ArticleTitleTelerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial clinical experience with 25 patients Ann Surg 3 446–447 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00000658-200203000-00022
S Merola P Weber A Wasielewski GH Ballantyne (2002) ArticleTitleComparison of laparoscopic colectomy with and without the aid of a robotic camera holder Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 1 46–51
TA Rockall A Darzi (2003) ArticleTitleRobot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery Surg Clin North Am 6 1463–1468
JP Ruurda IA Broeders (2003) ArticleTitleRobot-assisted laparoscopic intestinal anastomosis Surg Endosc 2 236–241 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00464-002-9016-2
JP Ruurda IA Broeders RP Simmermacher IH Rinkes TJ Vroonhoven ParticleVan (2002) ArticleTitleFeasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: an evaluation of 35 robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomies Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12 41–45 Occurrence Handle12008761
S Schluender J Conrad CM Divino B Gurland (2003) ArticleTitleRobot-assisted laparoscopic repair of ventral hernia with intracorporeal suturing Surg Endosc 6 656–658
N Stylopoulos D Rattner (2003) ArticleTitleRobotics and ergonomics Surg Clin North Am 6 1321–1337
GT Sung IS Gill (2003) ArticleTitleRobotic renal and adrenal surgery Surg Clin North Am 6 1469–1482
P Yohannes P Rotariu P Pinto AD Smith BR Lee (2002) ArticleTitleComparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 1 39–45 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01717-X
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Corcione, F., Esposito, C., Cuccurullo, D. et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc 19, 117–119 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-9004-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-9004-9