Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cholecystectomy using the Revo-i robotic surgical system from Korea: the first clinical study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the newly developed Revo-i (Meerecompany, Yongin, Republic of Korea) robotic surgical system during robot-assisted cholecystectomy. This prospective, phase I clinical study involved 15 patients with gallbladder-related disease. The primary outcome evaluated was the intraoperative safety of the Revo-i; the secondary outcomes measured were the 30-day postoperative complications and patient satisfaction with the Revo-i’s performance. Between August 17 and December 23, 2016, we performed 15 robot-assisted cholecystectomies. The operations were successfully completed, without any conversions to open or laparoscopic approaches. The mean patient age (53.07 years), mean operative time (115.3 ± 17.31 min [± standard deviation]), docking time (10.6 ± 3.16 min), console time (49.7 ± 15.41 min), actual dissection time (33.1 ± 10.53 min), and estimated blood loss (3.33 ± 6.17 mL) were determined. There were no intra- or postoperative complications, including gallbladder perforations. The mean hospital stay was 2.0 ± 1.00 days. Most patients reported satisfaction with the Revo-i’s performance. Performing robot-assisted cholecystectomies using the Revo-i is feasible and safe. This report describes the first clinical study of the Revo-i robotic surgical system in human patients.

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. Falk V, Diegeler A, Walther T, Banusch J, Brucerius J, Raumans J, Autschbach R, Mohr FW (2000) Total endoscopic computer enhanced coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 17(1):38–45

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Himpens J, Leman G, Cadiere GB (1998) Telesurgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 12(8):1091

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH (2012) A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 19(8):2485–2493. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2262-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 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(1):52–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-011-0422-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee J, Chung WY (2013) Robotic thyroidectomy and neck dissection: past, present, and future. Cancer J 19(2):151–161. https://doi.org/10.1097/PPO.0b013e31828aab61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Shariat SF, Stolzenburg JU, Van Poppel H, Zattoni F, Montorsi F, Mottrie A, Wilson TG (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62(3):431–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Weinberg L, Rao S, Escobar PF (2011) Robotic surgery in gynecology: an updated systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Int 2011:852061. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/852061

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Abcarian H (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53(7):1000–1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181d32096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs–the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363(8):701–704. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1006602

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Burke WM, Lu YS, Neugut AI, Herzog TJ, Hershman DL (2013) Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA 309(7):689–698. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim DK, Park DW, Rha KH (2016) Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy with the REVO-I Robot Platform in Porcine Models. Eur Urol 69(3):541–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kang CM, Chong JU, Lim JH, Park DW, Park SJ, Gim S, Ye HJ, Kim SH, Lee WJ (2017) Robotic cholecystectomy using the newly developed Korean robotic surgical system, Revo-i: a preclinical experiment in a porcine model. Yonsei Med J 58(5):1075–1077. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2017.58.5.1075

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Lim JH, Lee WJ, Park DW, Yea HJ, Kim SH, Kang CM (2017) Robotic cholecystectomy using Revo-i Model MSR-5000, the newly developed Korean robotic surgical system: a preclinical study. Surg Endosc 31(8):3391–3397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5357-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Abdel Raheem A, Troya IS, Kim DK, Kim SH, Won PD, Joon PS, Hyun GS, Rha KH (2016) Robot-assisted fallopian tube transection and anastomosis using the new REVO-I robotic surgical system: feasibility in a chronic porcine model. BJU Int 118(4):604–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Revo-i surgical solution website. https://revosurgical.com/#/main.asp Accessed April 2018

  17. Jamieson S (2004) Likert scales: how to (ab)use them. Med Educ 38(12):1217–1218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cuschier A, Terblanche J (1990) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: evolution, not revolution. Surg Endosc 4(3):125–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Marescaux J, Smith MK, Folscher D, Jamali F, Malassagne B, Leroy J (2001) Telerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial clinical experience with 25 patients. Ann Surg 234(1):1–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wakiya T, Kudo D, Toyoki Y, Ishido K, Kimura N, Narumi S, Kijima H, Hakamada K (2014) Evaluation of the usefulness of the indocyanine green clearance test for chemotherapy-associated liver injury in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis. Ann Surg Oncol 21(1):167–172. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3203-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Vidovszky TJ, Smith W, Ghosh J, Ali MR (2006) Robotic cholecystectomy: learning curve, advantages, and limitations. J Surg Res 136(2):172–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.03.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim JH, Baek NH, Li G, Choi SH, Jeong IH, Hwang JC, Kim JH, Yoo BM, Kim WH (2013) Robotic cholecystectomy with new port sites. World J Gastroenterol 19(20):3077–3082. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i20.3077

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Lee EK, Park E, Oh WO, Shin NM (2017) Comparison of the outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg Treat Res 93(1):27–34. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.93.1.27

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Giulianotti PC, Quadri P, Durgam S, Bianco FM (2017) Reconstruction/repair of iatrogenic biliary injuries: is the robot offering a new option? Ann Surg Short Clin Rep. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Zakhari A, Czuzoj-Shulman N, Spence AR, Gotlieb WH, Abenhaim HA (2015) Laparoscopic and robot-assisted hysterectomy for uterine cancer: a comparison of costs and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 213(5):665.e661–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pokorny M, Novara G, Geurts N, Dovey Z, De Groote R, Ploumidis A, Schatteman P, de Naeyer G, Mottrie A (2015) Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic enlargement: surgical technique and outcomes in a high-volume robotic centre. Eur Urol 68(3):451–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.03.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim MJ, Park SC, Park JW, Chang HJ, Kim DY, Nam BH, Sohn DK, Oh JH (2018) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a phase II open label prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 267(2):243–251. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Intuitive Surgical company website. https://www.intuitivesurgical.com/company/faqs.html. Accessed October 2017

  29. Gueli Alletti S, Rossitto C, Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Costantini B, Gidaro S, Monterossi G, Selvaggi L, Scambia G (2015) Telelap Alf-X-assisted laparoscopy for ovarian cyst enucleation: report of the first 10 cases. J Min Invasive Gynecol 22(6):1079–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2015.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korea Government (NRF-2015R1A2A2A04003460). The funding agency had no role in the data collection, study design, or writing of the manuscript. Dr. W.J. Lee serves as a consultant for Meerecompany (Yongin, Republic of Korea). The other authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Funding

This work was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea Grant, funded by the Korea Government (NRF-2015R1A2A2A04003460). The funding body did not have a role in the data collection, study design, or writing of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic surgery, Department of surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea

    Jin Hong Lim

  2. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic surgery, Department of surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea

    Woo Jung Lee & Chang Moo Kang

  3. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea

    Seung Ho Choi

Authors
  1. Jin Hong Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Woo Jung Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seung Ho Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chang Moo Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by JHL, SHC and CMK. WJL provided advice about robotic systems and the setting up of a clinical trial. The first draft of the manuscript was written by JHL and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chang Moo Kang.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

This work was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korea Government (NRF-2015R1A2A2A04003460). The funding agency had no role in the data collection, study design, or writing of the manuscript. Dr. W. J. Lee serves as a consultant for Meerecompany (Yongin, Republic of Korea). He was not involved in the surgeries, data collection, or analyses. He provided advice about robotic systems and the setting up of a clinical trial. None of the other authors have conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Ethics approval

Severance Hospital Institutional Review Board approved the current human study protocol (No. 1–2016-0019).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (WMV 89538 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lim, J.H., Lee, W.J., Choi, S.H. et al. Cholecystectomy using the Revo-i robotic surgical system from Korea: the first clinical study. Updates Surg 73, 1029–1035 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00877-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00877-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation