From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot

Schans, Emma M. van der; Hiep, Marijn A. J.; Consten, Esther C. J.; Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.

doi:10.1007/s11701-020-01057-8

Cited by 48 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In theory, the Xi system has been optimized, and the robotic arms have more joints, which should allow the surgeons to operate more smoothly, thus shortening the patients' time in the operating room. Schans et al [ 10 ] compared 18 cases of partial nephrectomy with the Xi system and 18 cases of partial nephrectomy with the Si system and found that the docking time of the Xi system was significantly shorter than that of the Si system. Similar results have been demonstrated in a study of robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy [ 11 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy

Lei

Xie

et al. 2021

BMC Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To compare the perioperative and short-term efficacy and cost of the da Vinci Xi and da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 175 patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si or Xi surgical systems in our hospital from June 2019 to June 2020. Of the 175 patients, 82 underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Xi surgery system, and 93 patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si surgical system. The perioperative outcomes, short-term efficacy and costs were compared between the two groups. Results The anesthesia time, operation time, docking time, indwelling catheter time and postoperative bed rest time in the Xi group were shorter than those in the Si group (respectively, 268.8 min vs. 219.3 min, P = 0.001; 228.2 min vs. 259.6 min, P < 0.001; 7.4 min vs. 12.7 min, P < 0.001; 8.6 d vs. 9.7 d, P = 0.036; 2.2 d vs. 2.6 d, P = 0.002). However, the total cost of hospitalization and the cost of intraoperative consumables in the Xi group were higher than those in the Si group (84,740.7 vs. 76,739.1 ¥, P = 0.003; 13,199.4 vs. 10,823.0 ¥, P = 0.019). Conclusions Although the cost of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is higher, compared with the Si system, the Xi system has better perioperative outcomes and can provide similar short-term efficacy and oncology outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy

Lei

Xie

et al. 2021

BMC Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Improved RCS technological development and a transition from DaVinci Si ® to the Xi ® model, and a dedicated robotic team can reduce total operation time. Several studies have confirmed a reduction in both docking and total operating times using the DaVinci Xi ® model, with an average of 21 cases needed to reach a statistically significant reduction in the docking time [ 34 – 36 ]. The technological development of RCS and the da Vinci Xi ® model’s introduction allows the surgeon more freedom and the ability to perform even technically demanding procedures that previously have been difficult to perform laparoscopically.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly implemented for the resection of colorectal cancer, although the scientific evidence for adopting this technique is still limited. This study’s main objective was to compare short-term complication rates, oncological outcomes, and the inflammatory stress response after colorectal resection for cancer performed laparoscopic or robot-assisted. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing the robot-assisted approach to laparoscopic surgery for elective malignant colorectal neoplasm. Certified colorectal and da Vinci ® robotic surgeons performed resections at a Danish tertiary colorectal high volume center from May 2017 to March 2019. We analyzed the two surgical groups using uni- and multivariate regression analyses to detect differences in intra- and postoperative clinical outcomes and the inflammatory stress response. Results Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were enrolled in the study. Significant differences favoring robot-assisted surgery was demonstrated for; length of hospital stay (4 days, interquartile range (4, 5) versus 5 days, interquartile range (4–7), p < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss (50 mL, interquartile range (20–100) versus 100 mL, interquartile range (50–150), p < 0.001) compared to laparoscopic surgery. The inflammatory stress response was significantly higher after laparoscopic compared to robot-assisted surgery reflected by an increase in C-reactive protein concentration (exponentiated coefficient = 1.23, 95% confidence interval (1.06–1.46), p = 0.008). No differences between the two groups were found concerning mortality, microradical resection rate, conversion to open surgery, and surgical or medical short-term complication rates. Conclusion Robot-assisted surgery is feasible and can be safely implemented for colorectal resections. The robot-assisted approach, when compared to laparoscopic surgery, was associated with improved intra- and postoperative outcomes. Extensive prospective studies are needed to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer.

show abstract

“…This ease of docking the SP robot addresses complaints surrounding extended set-up times with multiarm robotic systems in the past. 22 The SP robot consists of a "C-arm" which provides 360-degree rotation both around the remote center of the cannula and within the instrument port, which we have found to be immensely useful for transanal robotic surgery. This rotation allows visualization of all quadrants of the rectum without the need for repositioning or redocking of the robot.…”

Section: Evolution Of Transanal Surgery For Rectal Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic Transanal Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Marks

Perez

Salem

2021

Clin Colon Rectal Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotic transanal surgery is the culmination of major developments in rectal cancer management and minimally invasive surgery. It is the result of continuous efforts to tackle the challenges inherent to rectal cancer surgery. This latest technology holds great promise and excitement for the care of the rectal cancer patient. In this article, we will describe the evolution of transanal rectal cancer surgery and describe how the convergence of transanal transabdominal, transanal endoscopic microsurgery, transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME), and the different robotic platforms have culminated in the development of single port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) and single port robotic transanal total mesorectal excision (SP rtaTME). We will describe the indications, technical aspects, outcomes, benefits, and limitations of the SP rTAMIS and SP rtaTME.

show abstract

From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot

Cited by 48 publications

References 19 publications

A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy

A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy

Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients

Robotic Transanal Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About