Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) was compared with robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy (RLC). Surgical trainees performed the LC to avoid the surgeon’s experience bias. Methods: Two surgical trainees performed 10 CLCs and 10 RLCs at random with a Zeus-Aesop Surgical Robotic System. The primary efficacy parameters were the total time and the number of actions involved in the procedure. The secondary parameters were setup and dissection times, and the number of grasping and dissection actions. Surgical complications were evaluated. Results: For CLC and RLC, respectively, the total times were 95.4 ± 28 min and 123.5 ± 33.3 min and the total actions were 420 ± 176.3 and 363.5 ± 158.2. For CLC, the times required for setup (21 ± 10.4 min) and dissection (50.2 ± 17.7 min) were less than for RLC (33.8 ± 11.3 min and 72 ± 24.3 min, respectively). The numbers of grasping and dissection actions were not significantly different: 41.4 ± 26.5 and 378 ± 173.7, respectively, for CLC versus 48.9 ± 27 and 314.6 ± 141.9, respectively, for RLC. Conclusion: Although feasible, RLC requires significantly more time than CLC because of slower performed actions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. WD Boyd ND Desai B Kiaii R Rayman AH Menkis FN McKenzie RJ Novick (2000) ArticleTitleA comparison of robot-assisted versus manually constructed endoscopic coronary anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg 70 839–842 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01738-0 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvmtlCqsg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11016320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. GB Cadiere J Himpens O Germay R Izizaw M Degueldre . Vandromme E Capelluto J Bruyns (2001) ArticleTitleFeasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25 1467–1477 Occurrence Handle11760751

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. GB Cadiere J Himpens M Vertruyen J Bruyns O Germay G Leman R Izizaw (2001) ArticleTitleEvaluation of telesurgical (robotic) NISSEN fundoplication. Surg 15 918–923 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MrlvVClug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11605106

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. RJ Damiano Jr HA Tabaie MJ Mack JR Edgerton C Mullangi WP Graper SM Prasad (2001) ArticleTitleInitial prospective multicenter clinical trial of robotically assisted coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 72 1263–1268 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0003-4975(01)02980-0 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MrlvFalsQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11605613

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. KT Den Boer IH Straatsburg AV Schellinger LTh de Wit J Dankelman DJ Gouma (1999) ArticleTitleQuantitative analysis of the functionality and efficiency of three surgical dissection techniques: a time-motion analysis. J Lap Endosc Adv Surg Tech 9 389–395 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1MvltVeltQ%3D%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. T Falcone JM Goldberg H Margossian L Stevens (2000) ArticleTitleRobotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study. Fertil Steril 73 1040–1042

    Google Scholar 

  7. A Garcia-Ruiz M Gagner JH Miller CP Steiner JF Hahn (1998) ArticleTitleManual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks. Arch Surg 133 957–961 Occurrence Handle10.1001/archsurg.133.9.957 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1cvitVaktA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9749847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. J Marescaux MK Smith D Folscher F Jamali B Malassagne J Leroy (2001) ArticleTitleTelerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial clinical experience with 25 patients. Ann Surg 234 1–7 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00000658-200107000-00001 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MzlvFCisg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11420476

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. WC Melvin BJ Needleman KR Krause C Schneider EC Ellison (2002) ArticleTitleComputers-enhanced vs standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 6 11–16 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S1091-255X(01)00032-4 Occurrence Handle11986012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. D Nio WA Bemelman KT Boer MS Dunker DJ Gouma TM Gulik (2002) ArticleTitleEfficiency of manual versus robotical (Zeus) assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16 412–415 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00464-001-9012-y Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD387psFSitg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11928018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. H Reichenspurner RJ Damiano M Mack DH Boehm H Gulbins C Detter B Meiser R Ellgass B Reichart (1999) ArticleTitleUse of the voice-controlled and computer-assisted surgical system ZEUS for endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 118 11–16 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1MzhsF2ltg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10384178

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. JP Ruurda IA Broeders RP Simmermacher IH Rinkes TJ van Vroonhoven (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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. SM Strasberg M Hertl NJ Soper (1995) ArticleTitleAn analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 180 101–125 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqD1Mznt10%3D Occurrence Handle8000648

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center (AMC), Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    D. Nio, W. A. Bemelman, O. R. C. Busch, B. C. Vrouenraets & D. J. Gouma

Authors
  1. D. Nio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. A. Bemelman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. O. R. C. Busch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. C. Vrouenraets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. J. Gouma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. A. Bemelman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nio, D., Bemelman, W., Busch, O. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study. Surg Endosc 18, 379–382 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9133-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9133-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation