Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Robotic surgery in a routine procedure an evaluation of 40 robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomies

Die Anwendung des Operationsroboters bei einem allgemeinchirurgischen Routineeingriff Erfahrungen nach 40 Roboter-assistierten Cholezystektomien

  • Main Topics: Robotic Surgery
  • Published:
European Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Background: Laparoscopic surgery offers distinct benefits to patients but places a burden on surgeons regarding manoeuvrability of instruments and visualization of the operating field. The introduction of robotic telemanipulation systems offers a solution to these problems in videoscopic surgery.

Methods: In this study, the feasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery was assessed by performing 40 laparoscopic cholecystectomies with the da Vinci™ robotic system. Time necessary for system set-up and operation was recorded, as well as complications, technical problems, postoperative hospital stay, morbidity and mortality.

Results: 39/40 procedures were completed laparoscopically with the da Vinci™ system. There were no intraoperative complications and only minor technical problems. Median hospitalization was 2 days. System set-up time decreased with increasing experience of the operating team. Operating time was at least comparable to times reported for standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the literature. There was neither postoperative mortality nor morbidity at the time of discharge and during short-term follow-up.

Conclusions: Robot-assisted surgery was repeatedly proven as a safe and feasible approach to laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Zusammenfassung

Grundlagen: Während die laparoskopische Chirurgie den Patienten mehrere entscheidende Vorteile bietet, wird das Operieren für den Chirurgen hinsichtlich des Gesichtsfeldes und der Bewegungsfreiheit der Instrumente erschwert. Durch die Anwendung eines Operationroboters können diese Probleme gelöst werden.

Methodik: In dieser Studie wurde die Eignung des da Vinci™-Operationsroboters für die laparoskopische Chirurgie an 40 laparoskopischen Cholezystektomien untersucht. Neben der Aufrüstzeit des Systems und der reinen Operationszeit wurden Komplikationen, technische Probleme, stationäre Aufenthaltsdauer sowie Morbidität und Mortalität evaluiert.

Ergebnisse: 39 von 40 Eingriffen wurden mit dem Operationsroboter vollendet. Es kam lediglich zu geringfügigen technischen Problemen, intraoperative Komplikationen traten nicht auf. Die Aufrüstzeit verkürzte sich mit der wachsenden Erfahrung des Teams. Die Operationszeit war mit der für das konventionelle laparoskopische Verfahren vergleichbar. Die mediane stationäre Aufenthaltsdauer betrug 2 Tage. Im bisherigen Beobachtungszeitraum waren die Morbidität und Mortalität 0.

Schlußfolgerungen: Das Roboter-assistierte Verfahren hat sich für die laparoskopische Cholezystektomie als sicher und geeignet erwiesen.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bass EB, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD: Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1993;165:466–471.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Begos DG, Modlin IM: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: from gimmick to gold standard. J Clin Gastroenterol 1994;19:325–330.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Berggren U, Gordh T, Grama: Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy: hospitalization, sick leave, analgesia and trauma responses. Br J Surg 1994;81:1362–1365.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cappuccino H, Cargill S, Nguyen T: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: 563 cases at a community teaching hospital and a review of 12,201 cases in the literature. Monmouth Medical Center Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Group. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1994;4:213–221.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gadacz TR: Update on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, including a clinical pathway. Surg Clin North Am 2000;80:1127–1149.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gadacz TR: U.S. experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1993;165:450–454.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Heikkinen TJ, Haukipuro K, Bringman S: Comparison of laparoscopic and open Nissen fundoplication 2 years after operation. A prospective randomized trial. Surg Endosc 2000;14:1019–1023.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Himpens J, Leman G, Cadiere GB: Telesurgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy [letter]. Surg Endosc 1998;12:1091.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lafullarde T, Watson DI, Jamieson GG: Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: five-year results and beyond. Arch Surg 2001;136:180–184.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mohr FW, Onnasch JF, Falk V: The evolution of minimally invasive valve surgery — 2 year experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999;15:233–238.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Perissat J: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the European experience. Am J Surg 1993;165:444–449.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Scott TR, Zucker KA, Bailey RW: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a review of 12,397 patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1992;2:191–198.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Stiff G, Rhodes M, Kelly A: Long-term pain: less common after laparoscopic than open cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1994;81:1368–1370.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Vanek VW, Rhodes R, Dallis DJ: Results of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy in a community hospital. South Med J 1995;88:555–566.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. A. M. J. Broeders.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ruurda, J.P., Simmermacher, R.P.M., Borel Rinkes, I.H.M. et al. Robotic surgery in a routine procedure an evaluation of 40 robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Eur. Surg. 34, 170–172 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1563-2563.2002.02038.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1563-2563.2002.02038.x

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation