Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery

Melvin, W. Scott; Needleman, Bradley J.; Krause, Kevin R.; Schneider, C.; Wolf, Randall K.; Michler, Robert E.; Ellison, E. Christopher

doi:10.1007/s00464-001-8192-9

Cited by 144 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two other papers mentioned esophageal resection among 211 and 35 cases, respectively, operated on with a robotic-assisted technique, without further details about the technique or the patients' outcome [14,15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy

Gutt¹,

Bințințan

Köninger³

et al. 2006

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Mountain View, CA, USA) Robotic Surgical System was described in detail elsewhere [13][14][15][16]. In summary, it is a master-slave manipulator device consisting of three separate parts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy

Gutt¹,

Bințințan

Köninger³

et al. 2006

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The question remains if these advantages detected experimentally can be transferred to the clinical setting. In fact, several clinical studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of a variety of robotassisted procedures [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. However, there is only a limited number of controlled trials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No relevant difference in quality of life and functional outcome at 12 months’ follow-up—a randomised controlled trial comparing robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Müller‐Stich

Reiter

Mehrabi

et al. 2009

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Robotic systems have been pursued as a solution to these limitations [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. In June 2000, we started to assess robotic assistance in endoscopic surgery in a prospective set-up.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robot-Assisted Endoscopic Surgery: A Four-Year Single-Center Experience

Ruurda¹,

Draaisma²,

Hillegersberg³

et al. 2005

Dig Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Robotic systems were introduced in the late 1990s with the objective to overcome the technical limitations of endoscopic surgery. In this prospective cohort study the potential safety, feasibility, pitfalls and challenges of robotic systems in gastrointestinal endoscopic surgery are assessed and our vision on future perspectives is presented. Methods:Between August 2000 and December 2004, 208 procedures were performed with support of the Intuitive Surgical da Vinci™ robotic system. We started with cholecystectomies (40) and Nissen fundoplications (41) to gain experience with robot-assisted surgery. In the following years more complex procedures were carried out, i.e. colorectal procedures (7), type III/IV paraesophageal hernia repair (32), redo Nissen fundoplications (9), Heller myotomies (24), esophageal resections (22), rectopexies (16) and aortobifemoral bypasses (3). Results:The median robotic set-up time was 13 min, and 7 min in the last 50 procedures. The median operating time for the total of procedures was 120 min (45–420) and the median blood loss was 30 ml (0–800). Fourteen procedures were converted to open surgery (6.7%). Equipment-related problems, such as start-up failures and positioning difficulties of the robotic arms, were encountered in 11 cases (5.3%). Postoperative complications were seen in 11 patients (11/176, 6.3%) after robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures. Pulmonary complications occurred in 11 patients, cardiac in 3, anastomic leakage in 3, chylous leakage in 3 and vocal cord paralysis in 3 after thoracoscopic esophagolymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. One patient died 12 days after esophageal resection (0.5%). Conclusion:During the implementation of this robotic system, we experienced an obvious learning curve, particularly with regard to the positioning of the robot cart and communication between the surgeon and operating team. After 4 years, we have experienced that the merits of the current generation of this technology probably is preserved to complex endoscopic procedures with delicate dissection and suturing. In the nearby future we will focus on the treatment of motility disorders and malignancies of the esophagus and stomach. The position of the robot in the endoscopic operating room will have to be clarified by the outcome of prospective research. Furthermore, priorities have to be acclaimed on technical sophistication and cost reduction of these systems.

show abstract

Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery

Abstract: Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery is a safe and effective treatment method for a variety of diseases of the proximal gastrointestinal tract. Further study is needed to determine the benefits of this approach as compared with current technology.

Cited by 144 publications

References 6 publications

Robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy

Robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy

No relevant difference in quality of life and functional outcome at 12 months’ follow-up—a randomised controlled trial comparing robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Robot-Assisted Endoscopic Surgery: A Four-Year Single-Center Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About