Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopy Versus Robotics: Ergonomics—Does It Matter?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery

Abstract

Laparoscopy offers significant benefits to the patients, mainly due to its minimally invasive nature. Nevertheless, it is also characterized by significant ergonomic limitations which make it tedious for the surgeon. Robotic surgery seems to offer a valid solution to this problem but is also accompanied by several important ergonomic handicaps. In this chapter, we want to focus on the ergonomic problems of laparoscopy, in comparison to the da Vinci system, based on the current literature and personal long-term experience with both techniques. Additionally, we present different solutions to the ergonomic predicaments that one may encounter during a complex procedure, and future perspectives that could aid in the creation of ergonomically designed operating theatres for minimally invasive procedures.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Vereczkel A, Bubb H, Feussner H. Laparoscopic surgery and ergonomics: it’s time to think of ourselves as well. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(10):1680–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9020-1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hemal AK, Srinivas M, Charles AR. Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopy. J Endourol. 2001;15(5):499–503. https://doi.org/10.1089/089277901750299294.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wauben LS, van Veelen MA, Gossot D, Goossens RH. Application of ergonomic guidelines during minimally invasive surgery: a questionnaire survey of 284 surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(8):1268–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0647-y.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berguer R, Forkey DL, Smith WD. Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 1999;13(5):466–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Deinhardt. Manipulators and integrated OR systems - requirements and solutions. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2003;12(6):284–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700310018515.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Stone R, McCloy R. Ergonomics in medicine and surgery. BMJ. 2004;328(7448):1115–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7448.1115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Koneczny S, Matern U. Instruments for the evaluation of ergonomics in surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2004;13(3):167–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700410033652.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. van Veelen MA, Kazemier G, Koopman J, Goossens RH, Meijer DW. Assessment of the ergonomically optimal operating surface height for laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2002;12(1):47–52. https://doi.org/10.1089/109264202753486920.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Matern U, Koneczny S. Safety, hazards and ergonomics in the operating room. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(11):1965–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9396-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically—assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2001;87(4):408–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rassweiler J, Frede T, Seemann O, Stock C, Sentker L. Telesurgical laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Initial experience. Eur Urol. 2001;40(1):75–83. https://doi.org/10.1159/000049752.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rassweiler J, Binder J, Frede T. Robotic and telesurgery: will they change our future? Curr Opin Urol. 2001;11(3):309–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hemal AK, Menon M. Robotics in urology. Curr Opin Urol. 2004;14(2):89–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Binder J, Brautigam R, Jonas D, Bentas W. Robotic surgery in urology: fact or fantasy? BJU Int. 2004;94(8):1183–7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2004.05130.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dasgupta P, Jones A, Gill IS. Robotic urological surgery: a perspective. BJU Int. 2005;95(1):20–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05241.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su LM. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy—critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):612–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.054.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lux MM, Marshall M, Erturk E, Joseph JV. Ergonomic evaluation and guidelines for use of the daVinci robot system. J Endourol. 2010;24(3):371–5. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Reyes DA, Tang B, Cuschieri A. Minimal access surgery (MAS)-related surgeon morbidity syndromes. Surg Endosc. 2006;20(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0315-2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. van der Schatte Olivier RH, Van’t Hullenaar CD, Ruurda JP, Broeders IA. Ergonomics, user comfort, and performance in standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(6):1365–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0184-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. van Det MJ, Meijerink WJ, Hoff C, van Veelen MA, Pierie JP. Ergonomic assessment of neck posture in the minimally invasive surgery suite during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(11):2421–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0042-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mitre AI, Duarte RJ, Arap MA, Coelho RF, Lopes RI, Trigo-Rocha F, Srougi M. Ergonomic aspects related to surgeon position in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2009;23(2):259–62. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.0434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gofrit ON, Mikahail AA, Zorn KC, Zagaja GP, Steinberg GD, Shalhav AL. Surgeons’ perceptions and injuries during and after urologic laparoscopic surgery. Urology. 2008;71(3):404–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.077.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Johnston WK 3rd, Hollenbeck BK, Wolf JS Jr. Comparison of neuromuscular injuries to the surgeon during hand-assisted and standard laparoscopic urologic surgery. J Endourol. 2005;19(3):377–81. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2005.19.377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wolf JS Jr, Marcovich R, Gill IS, Sung GT, Kavoussi LR, Clayman RV, McDougall EM, Shalhav A, Dunn MD, Afane JS, Moore RG, Parra RO, Winfield HN, Sosa RE, Chen RN, Moran ME, Nakada SY, Hamilton BD, Albala DM, Koleski F, Das S, Adams JB, Polascik TJ. Survey of neuromuscular injuries to the patient and surgeon during urologic laparoscopic surgery. Urology. 2000;55(6):831–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee G, Lee T, Dexter D, Godinez C, Meenaghan N, Catania R, Park A. Ergonomic risk associated with assisting in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(1):182–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0141-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Matern U, Waller P. Instruments for minimally invasive surgery: principles of ergonomic handles. Surg Endosc. 1999;13(2):174–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vereczkei A, Feussner H, Negele T, Fritzsche F, Seitz T, Bubb H, Horvath OP. Ergonomic assessment of the static stress confronted by surgeons during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(7):1118–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9157-y.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. van Det MJ, Meijerink WJ, Hoff C, Totte ER, Pierie JP. Optimal ergonomics for laparoscopic surgery in minimally invasive surgery suites: a review and guidelines. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(6):1279–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0148-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Matern U. Ergonomic deficiencies in the operating room: examples from minimally invasive surgery. Work. 2009;33(2):165–8. https://doi.org/10.3233/wor-2009-0862.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Breedveld P, Stassen HG, Meijer DW, Jakimowicz JJ. Manipulation in laparoscopic surgery: overview of impeding effects and supporting aids. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1999;9(6):469–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Uhrich ML, Underwood RA, Standeven JW, Soper NJ, Engsberg JR. Assessment of fatigue, monitor placement, and surgical experience during simulated laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(4):635–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8151-5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A. Task performance in endoscopic surgery is influenced by location of the image display. Ann Surg. 1998;227(4):481–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Schurr MO, Kunert W, Arezzo A, Buess G. The role and future of endoscopic imaging systems. Endoscopy. 1999;31(7):557–62. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-1999-52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Pietrabissa A, Scarcello E, Carobbi A, Mosca F. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video system for the trained endoscopic surgeon and the beginner. Endosc Surg Allied Technol. 1994;2(6):315–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McDougall EM, Soble JJ, Wolf JS Jr, Nakada SY, Elashry OM, Clayman RV. Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional laparoscopic video systems. J Endourol. 1996;10(4):371–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. van Veelen, Jakimowicz, Kazemier. Improved physical ergonomics of laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2004;13(3):161–6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700410033193.

  37. Frede T, Hammady A, Klein J, Teber D, Inaki N, Waseda M, Buess G, Rassweiler J. The radius surgical system—a new device for complex minimally invasive procedures in urology? Eur Urol. 2007;51(4):1015–22.; discussion 1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Frede T, Stock C, Renner C, Budair Z, Abdel-Salam Y, Rassweiler J. Geometry of laparoscopic suturing and knotting techniques. J Endourol. 1999;13(3):191–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Frede T, Stock C, Rassweiler JJ, Alken P. Retroperitoneoscopic and laparoscopic suturing: tips and strategies for improving efficiency. J Endourol. 2000;14(10):905–13. discussion 913-904.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Schurr MO, Buess GF, Wieth F, Saile HJ, Botsch M. Ergonomic surgeon's chair for use during minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 1999;9(4):244–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Albayrak A, van Veelen MA, Prins JF, Snijders CJ, de Ridder H, Kazemier G. A newly designed ergonomic body support for surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(10):1835–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9249-1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Rassweiler JJ, Goezen AS, Jalal AA, Schulze M, Pansadoro V, Pini G, Kim F, Turner C. A new platform improving the ergonomics of laparoscopic surgery: initial clinical evaluation of the prototype. Eur Urol. 2012;61(1):226–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.09.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gozen AS, Tokas T, Tschada A, Jalal A, Klein J, Rassweiler J. Direct comparison of the different conventional laparoscopic positions with the ethos surgical platform in a laparoscopic pelvic surgery simulation setting. J Endourol. 2015;29(1):95–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0051.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tokas T, Gözen AS, Tschada A, Rassweiler J. PD18-11 a laparoscopic combination with comparable ergonomic results to robotic surgery, tested in an experimental laparoscopic radical prostatectomy setting. J Urol. 193(4):e390. doi:10.1016/jjuro201502.696.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Berguer R, Smith W. An ergonomic comparison of robotic and laparoscopic technique: the influence of surgeon experience and task complexity. J Surg Res. 2006;134(1):87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2005.10.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Lee EC, Rafiq A, Merrell R, Ackerman R, Dennerlein JT. Ergonomics and human factors in endoscopic surgery: a comparison of manual vs telerobotic simulation systems. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(8):1064–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-8213-6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Bagrodia A, Raman JD. Ergonomics considerations of radical prostatectomy: physician perspective of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted techniques. J Endourol. 2009;23(4):627–33. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.0556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chandra V, Nehra D, Parent R, Woo R, Reyes R, Hernandez-Boussard T, Dutta S. A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices. Surgery. 2010;147(6):830–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2009.11.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hubert N, Gilles M, Desbrosses K, Meyer JP, Felblinger J, Hubert J. Ergonomic assessment of the surgeon’s physical workload during standard and robotic assisted laparoscopic procedures. Int J Med Robot. 2013;9(2):142–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1489.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Tse MA, Masters RS, McManus AM, Lo CY, Patil NG. Trunk muscle training, posture fatigue, and performance in laparoscopic surgery. J Endourol. 2008;22(5):1053–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kenngott HG, Muller-Stich BP, Reiter MA, Rassweiler J, Gutt CN. Robotic suturing: technique and benefit in advanced laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2008;17(3):160–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700802103381.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Guillonneau B, Menon M, Montorsi F, Patel V, Rassweiler J, Van Poppel H. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009;55(5):1037–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.036.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Rassweiler J, Klein J, Teber D, Schulze M, Frede T. Mechanical simulators for training for laparoscopic surgery in urology. J Endourol. 2007;21(3):252–62. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9983.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Baumhauer M, Feuerstein M, Meinzer HP, Rassweiler J. Navigation in endoscopic soft tissue surgery: perspectives and limitations. J Endourol. 2008;22(4):751–66. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9827.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Stolzenburg JU, Truss MC, Do M, Rabenalt R, Pfeiffer H, Dunzinger M, Aedtner B, Stief CG, Jonas U, Dorschner W. Evolution of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE)—technical improvements and development of a nerve-sparing, potency-preserving approach. World J Urol. 2003;21(3):147–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-003-0351-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol. 2000;163(6):1643–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Lee DH, Choi J, Park JW, Bach DJ, Song SJ, Kim YH, Jo Y, Sun K. An implementation of sensor-based force feedback in a compact laparoscopic surgery robot. ASAIO J. 2009;55(1):83–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAT.0b013e31819018e7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors would specially like to thank Nikos Vatsitsis for preparing the graphics of this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology and Andrology, General Hospital Hall i.T, Hall in Tirol, Austria

    Theodoros Tokas

  2. Department of Urology, SLK-Kliniken Heilbronn, Heilbronn, Germany

    Ali Serdar Gözen & Jens Rassweiler

  3. Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Jan Klein

  4. Department of Urology, SLK-Kliniken Heilbronn, Heilbronn, Germany

    Alexandra Tschada

  5. Department of Urology, Helios-Klinik, Müllheim, Germany

    Thomas Frede

  6. Department of Urology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Dogu Teber

Authors
  1. Theodoros Tokas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Serdar Gözen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alexandra Tschada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas Frede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dogu Teber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jens Rassweiler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

    Ashok K. Hemal

  2. Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA

    Mani Menon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tokas, T. et al. (2018). Laparoscopy Versus Robotics: Ergonomics—Does It Matter?. In: Hemal, A., Menon, M. (eds) Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20645-5_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20644-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20645-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation