Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery

  • Review
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In the last decade, the robotic platform has been used in different surgical fields. However, the field of foregut and bariatric surgery is still evolving. Most surgeons still prefer laparoscopic techniques because it has proven clinical benefits, does not require complex setups, and does not have high costs compared with that of robotics. The aim of this article is to review the outcomes of foregut and bariatric surgery and its potential clinical advantages.

Methods

We performed a search on PUBMED for the most relevant articles published in the field of robotic bariatric and foregut surgery in the last 15 years. More than 40 articles were selected and included on this review. Several systematic reviews were also included. Very few randomized clinical trials are available.

Results

For the most part, robotic procedures were associated with better ergonomics for the surgeon, better visualization of the anatomy, easier fine dissection (i.e., lymphadenectomy) when required, and higher costs. In foregut surgery, the robotic system is associated with a significant lower rate of mucosal perforation in Heller myotomy compared to laparoscopy. In bariatric surgery, the clinical advantages have not been well documented yet; however, it seems robotics shortens the learning curve of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

Conclusion

Foregut and bariatric robotic surgery is a surgical field still in development. For the vast majority of the procedures in this area, the clinical outcomes of robotic surgery are the same of standard laparoscopy. However, the use of robots in selected cases may have specific advantages and may overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery. More research is needed, especially large and well-designed randomized clinical trials, to elucidate more accurate conclusions.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, Schneider C, Wolf RK, Michler RE, Ellison EC (2002) Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery. Initial experience in foregut surgery. Surg Endosc 16:1790–1792

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, Rubino F, Mutter D, Vix M, Butner SE, Smith MK (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413:379–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wilson EB (2009) The evolution of robotic general surgery. Scand J Surg 98:125–129

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel A, Patel M, Lytle N, Toro JP, Medbery RL, Bluestein S, Perez SD, Sweeney JF, Davis SS, Lin E (2014) Can we become better robot surgeons through simulator practice? Surg Endosc 28(3):847–853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ito F, Gould JC (2006) Robotic foregut surgery. Int J Med Robot 2:287–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kastenmeier A, Gonzales H, Gould JC (2012) Robotic applications in the treatment of diseases of the esophagus. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:304–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Melvin WS, Dundon JM, Talamini M, Horgan S (2005) Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery minimizes esophageal perforation during Heller myotomy. Surgery 138:553–558 discussion 558–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Horgan S, Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Omelanczuck P, Elli F, Moser F, Durand L, Caracoche M, Nefa J, Bustos S, Donahue P, Ferraina P (2005) Robotic-assisted Heller myotomy versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for the treatment of esophageal achalasia: multicenter study. J Gastrointest Surg 9:1020–1029 discussion 1029–1030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Moser F, Baptista M, Donahue P, Horgan S (2006) Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia facilitated by robotic assistance. Surg Endosc 20:1105–1112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaligram A, Unnirevi J, Simorov A, Kothari VM, Oleynikov D (2012) How does the robot affect outcomes? A retrospective review of open, laparoscopic, and robotic Heller myotomy for achalasia. Surg Endosc 26:1047–1050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, Blasco JA, Guerra M, Andradas E, Plana MN (2010) Efficacy of the Da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252:254–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, Bruyns J, Fourtanier G (1999) Nissen fundoplication done by remotely controlled robotic technique. Ann Chir 53:137–141

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, Schneider C, Ellison EC (2002) Computer-enhanced vs. standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 6:11–15 discussion 15–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Newlin ME, Mikami DJ, Melvin SW (2004) Initial experience with the four-arm computer-enhanced telesurgery device in foregut surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14:121–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam AP, Hagen ME, Talamini M, Horgan S, Wagner OJ (2010) Robotic vs. laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot 6:125–131

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang Z, Zheng Q, Jin Z (2012) Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. ANZ J Surg 82:112–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gehrig T, Mehrabi A, Fischer L, Kenngott H, Hinz U, Gutt CN, Muller-Stich BP (2013) Robotic-assisted paraesophageal hernia repair—a case–control study. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 398:691–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Horgan S, Berger RA, Elli EF, Espat NJ (2003) Robotic-assisted minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy. Am Surg 69:624–626

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Watson TJ (2008) Robotic esophagectomy: is it an advance and what is the future? Ann Thorac Surg 85:S757–S759

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Galvani CA, Gorodner MV, Moser F, Jacobsen G, Chretien C, Espat NJ, Donahue P, Horgan S (2008) Robotically assisted laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 22:188–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Puntambekar SP, Rayate N, Joshi S, Agarwal G (2011) Robotic transthoracic esophagectomy in the prone position: experience with 32 patients with esophageal cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 142:1283–1284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dunn DH, Johnson EM, Morphew JA, Dilworth HP, Krueger JL, Banerji N (2013) Robot-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy: a 3-year single-center experience. Dis Esophagus 26:159–166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarkaria IS, Rizk NP, Finley DJ, Bains MS, Adusumilli PS, Huang J, Rusch VW (2013) Combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy using a four-arm platform: experience, technique and cautions during early procedure development. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 43:e107–e115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Huang KH, Lan YT, Fang WL, Chen JH, Lo SS, Hsieh MC, Li AF, Chiou SH, Wu CW (2012) Initial experience of robotic gastrectomy and comparison with open and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 16:1303–1310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kang BH, Xuan Y, Hur H, Ahn CW, Cho YK, Han SU (2012) Comparison of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: the learning curve of robotic surgery. J Gastric Cancer 12:156–163

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Coratti A, Annecchiarico M, Di Marino M, Gentile E, Coratti F, Giulianotti PC (2013) Robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: current status and technical considerations. World J Surg 37(12):2771–2781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH (2009) Robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: lessons learned from an initial 100 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 249:927–932

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Marano A, Hyung WJ (2012) Robotic gastrectomy: the current state of the art. J Gastric Cancer 12:63–72

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, Favretti F (1999) The world’s first obesity surgery performed by a surgeon at a distance. Obes Surg 9:206–209

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Horgan S, Vanuno D (2001) Robots in laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 11:415–419

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fourman MM, Saber AA (2012) Robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8:483–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Edelson PK, Dumon KR, Sonnad SS, Shafi BM, Williams NN (2011) Robotic vs. conventional laparoscopic gastric banding: a comparison of 407 cases. Surg Endosc 25:1402–1408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hubens G, Balliu L, Ruppert M, Gypen B, Van Tu T, Vaneerdeweg W (2008) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure performed with the da Vinci robot system: is it worth it? Surg Endosc 22:1690–1696

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Snyder BE, Wilson T, Leong BY, Klein C, Wilson EB (2010) Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y Gastric bypass: minimizing morbidity and mortality. Obes Surg 20:265–270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ayloo SM, Addeo P, Buchs NC, Shah G, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: is there a difference in outcomes? World J Surg 35:637–642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Park CW, Lam EC, Walsh TM, Karimoto M, Ma AT, Koo M, Hammill C, Murayama K, Lorenzo CS, Bueno R (2011) Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass performed in a community hospital setting: the future of bariatric surgery? Surg Endosc 25:3312–3321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Germain A, Reibel N, Brunaud L (2011) Totally robotic gastric bypass. J Visc Surg 148:e267–e272

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam AP, Venkat-Ramen V, Kinross J, Ziprin P (2011) Robotic vs. laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in morbidly obese patients: systematic review and pooled analysis. Int J Med Robot 7:393–400

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hagen ME, Pugin F, Chassot G, Huber O, Buchs N, Iranmanesh P, Morel P (2012) Reducing cost of surgery by avoiding complications: the model of robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 22:52–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Vilallonga R, Fort JM, Gonzalez O, Caubet E, Boleko A, Neff KJ, Armengol M (2012) The initial learning curve for robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy: a surgeon’s experience while introducing the robotic technology in a Bariatric Surgery Department. Minim Invasive Surg 2012:347131

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Vilallonga R, Fort JM, Caubet E, Gonzalez O, Armengol M (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a comparative study with 200 patients. Obes Surg 23:1501–1507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Romero RJ, Kosanovic R, Rabaza JR, Seetharamaiah R, Donkor C, Gallas M, Gonzalez AM (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy: experience of 134 cases and comparison with a systematic review of the laparoscopic approach. Obes Surg 23:1743–1752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rezvani M, Sucandy I, Antanavicius G (2013) Totally robotic stapleless vertical sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Obes Relat Dis 9:e79–e81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

Drs. Juan Toro, Edward Lin, and Ankit Patel have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Funding

There is no funding for this publication.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest for all authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Emory Endosurgery/Bariatrics Unit, Department of Surgery, Emory University, 550 Peachtree Street, Medical Office Tower 9th Floor, Atlanta, GA, 30308, USA

    Juan P. Toro, Edward Lin & Ankit D. Patel

Authors
  1. Juan P. Toro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ankit D. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan P. Toro.

Additional information

This paper is not based on any previous presentation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toro, J.P., Lin, E. & Patel, A.D. Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery. Surg Endosc 29, 1–8 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3646-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3646-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation