Docking for robotic extraperitoneal para-aortic lymphadenectomy with Da Vinci Xi surgical system

Conventional Laparoscopy versus Robotic-Assisted Aortic Lymph-Nodal Staging for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…In addition, the learning curve for laparoscopic aortic lymphadenectomy [ 37 ] is longer than robotic procedure [ 38 ] due to limited rigid instruments and the 2-dimensional view of the laparoscope’s video camera, which requires greater surgeon skills to perform this procedure. Furthermore, aortic lymphadenectomy is a single-quadrant surgery and perfectly matches with the robotic approach, using its increasing precision that would otherwise suffer in case of re-docking [ 39 ]. However, the selection of the patients for lymph node staging surgery should be careful, considering that the benefits of diagnostic surgery should justify its possible morbidities.…”

Robotic pelvic and para-aortic retroperitoneal lymph nodes staging for early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer

“…The video features the following steps to perform the retroperitoneal procedure by robot-assisted laparoscopy. 2 After locating the anatomic landmarks, we dissect the right common iliac artery caudally to the bifurcation of the external iliac artery and internal iliac artery and cranially to the left renal vein. We then dissect the inferior vena cava from the intersection with the right ureter to the left renal veins.…”

A Comparative Study of the Modified Lateral Position of Javelin and the Conventional Position of Body in the Operation of Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction with Da Vinci Xi Platform

“…The control group A used conventional lateral position, the control group B used lumbar bridge pad elevation lateral position, and the observation group C used modified javelin lateral position (Figure 1). We compared the operation position arrangement time, operation time, intraoperative blood loss and the incidence of intraoperative complications in the three groups [1]. The results showed that the three groups had successfully completed the operation, and there was no significant difference in the operation time, intraoperative blood loss and the incidence…”