Comparison of Laparoscopic Colectomy With and Without the Aid of a Robotic Camera Holder

Abstract

The use of a robotic camera holder (AESOP 3000; Computer Motion, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, U.S.A.) during laparoscopic surgery is slowly becoming more popular with laparoscopic surgeons. However, few published reports document the effects of the robot on operative outcomes or operative times. In the current study, we compared the use of a voice-controlled robotic camera holder to a human camera holder in a series of laparoscopic colectomies. The outcome data measured included the number of patients with postoperative complications, the patients' length of stay at the hospital, and the operative times for the procedures. There were 2 complications among the 11 patients in group 1 (colectomies performed without a robotic camera holder), versus 2 complications among the 15 patients in group 2 (colectomies performed with a robotic camera holder) (P = NS). Patients in group 1 had an average length of stay of 4.1 days, versus 4.4 days for those in group 2 (P = NS). The operative time for group 1 was 235 minutes, compared with 213 minutes for group 2 (P = NS). The use of a voice-controlled robotic camera holder does not alter the length of the operative procedure, the patient's length of stay, or postoperative morbidity. However, surgeons often have a subjective sense that there is less smudging, fogging, and inadvertent movements of the laparoscope when it is controlled by a robotic system. In addition, using a voice-controlled robot as a camera holder does eliminate the need for a surgical assistant.

Development and transferability of a cost-effective laparoscopic camera navigation simulator

“…Although not definitively proven, poor LCN performance may have a negative impact on surgeon performance, prolonging operative times. To overcome these problems, some surgeons have used robotic LCN systems with good results [2,18,20,21]. However, as compared with an experienced human camera operator, robotic systems have not demonstrated improvement in surgeon performance.…”

“…Because interrater reliability of this method had not been established, we used a single blinded rater to minimize the possibility of consistency problems. Finally, as other studies have done [2,14,[18][19][20], we recorded procedure time, which, although limited in terms of directly reflecting LCN skill, may have shed some light on the effect of LCN skill on surgeon performance.…”

Development of a compact laparoscope manipulator (P-arm)

“…9 View of a laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Two surgeons performed the operation via one camera port and four working ports for maintaining a stable view and are being widely used [1,5]. However, such robotic systems continue to have several problems and limitations.…”

“…These merits have been ascertained in various types of surgery [1][2][3][4][5][6]. However, several problems have been noted.…”

Feasibility and Usefulness of a Joystick-Guided Robotic Scope Holder (Soloassist) in Laparoscopic Surgery

“…They react to the voice, to head motion signals, or to a joystick positioned on the left-hand side of the instrument. Merola et al [24] reported that there was less smudging, fogging, and inadvertent movements of the laparoscope when it was controlled by a robotic system. Also, Takahashi et al [16] examined 25 cases of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with ViKY and reported its benefits.…”