The da Vinci Xi system for robotic total/subtotal colectomy vs. conventional laparoscopy: short-term outcomes

Ozben, Volkan; Muijnck, Cansu de; Karabork, Merve; Ozoran, Emre; Zenger, Serkan; Bilgin, İsmail Ahmet; Aytaç, Erman; Baca, Bilgi; Balık, Emre; Hamzaoğlu, İsmail; Karahasanoğlu, Tayfun; Buğra, Dursun

doi:10.1007/s10151-019-02066-y

Cited by 14 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Operating time seems rather high in this series [25][26][27] . However, mean skin-to-skin time ranged within those reported previously for the early experience with adopting RCS [28][29][30] . As expected, there was a significant reduction of operation times towards the second phase of this program at our institution as observed by others representing an important aspect of a learning curve.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program

Sarikaya

Benhidjeb

Iosivan

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ASA score is known to be an independent predictor of complications and mortality following colorectal surgery. We evaluated early outcome in the initiation phase of a robotic oncological colorectal resection program in dependence of comorbidity and learning curve. 43 consecutive colorectal cancer patients (median age: 74 years) who underwent robotic surgery were firstly analysed defined by physical status (group A = ASA1 + 2; group B = ASA3). Secondly, outcome was evaluated relating to surgery date (group E: early phase; group L: late phase). There were no differences among groups A and B with regard to gender, BMI, skin-to-skin operative times (STS), N- and M-status, hospital-stay as well as overall rate of complications according to Dindo-Clavien and no one-year mortality. GroupA when compared to group B demonstrated significantly lower mean age (65.5 years ± 11.4 years vs 75.8 years ± 8.9 years), T-stage and ICU-stay. When separately analyzed for patients age ICU-stay was comparable (> 75 years vs. < 75 years). Group E and L demonstrated comparable characteristics and early outcome except more frequent lymphatic fistulas in group E. STS was reduced in group L compared to group E. Beyond learning curve aspects in our series, we could demonstrate that patient’s physical condition according to ASA rather than age may have an impact on early outcome in the initial phase of a robotic oncological colorectal program.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program

Sarikaya

Benhidjeb

Iosivan

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies have shown that rates of conversion are lower in patients undergoing robotic (0% to 10%) than laparoscopic (6% to 15%) colectomy. [3][4][5]16 The prolonged operation time required for robotic procedures may be because of the extra time required for instrument installation and more frequent transient ileal diversion, as the time at the console for the main procedure constituted a little more than half the total operation time. The percentage of malignant lesions was higher in the robot-assisted group as our public insurance covers nearly 95% of all follow-up expenses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the use of robotic surgery in multiquadrant procedures for patients undergoing TC/TPC remains challenging. 5 Therefore, most robot-assisted TC/ TPC has been restricted to completion proctectomy combined with open or laparoscopic colon dissection. 6 A limited case-series of patients undergoing entirely robot-assisted TC/TPC showed procedural ambiguities to follow.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Entirely Robot-assisted Total Colectomy/Total Proctocolectomy Compared With a Laparoscopic Approach

Kim

Lee²,

Yoon³

et al. 2020

Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy &Amp; Percutaneous Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous robot-assisted total colectomy/total proctocolectomy (TC/TPC) has been mostly confined to completion proctectomy combined with open or laparoscopic colon dissection. This study describes an integrative method of entirely robot-assisted maintaining anatomical dissection with single docking and one-off arm placement.Materials and Methods: Twenty patients who underwent robotassisted TC/TPC and 36 who underwent laparoscopic procedures at the Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) were enrolled.Results: Mean operation time was ∼1 hour longer in the robot-assisted than in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.003), due primarily to the extra time required for instrument installation and more frequent transient ileal diversion. Three patients (8%) in the laparoscopic group required conversion to open surgery, compared with none in the robot-assisted group. Rates of postoperative adverse events did not differ in the 2 groups (P = 0.063). Short (8 cm) ileal pouches were applied to all patients who underwent robot-assisted TPC/ileal-pouch anal anastomosis, but to one patient who underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were no discrepancies of mean daily bowel movement between patients with short and long ileal pouches 6 months after surgery (P = 0.694), showing 5 times per day (range: 1 to 10). Conclusion:The advantages of the boom system and motionsensitive table were successfully utilized to integrate anatomical dissection with the multiquadrant procedures of TC/TPC, with none of these patients requiring conversion to open surgery. Refinement of these techniques may overcome some of the technical and time-related and cost-related concerns of the robotic approach.

show abstract

“…The selected studies included a total of 14,329 patients, of whom 6472 underwent robotic surgery and 7857 laparoscopic surgery. Fifty-one studies were retrospective [13,[25][26][27]32,33,37,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][51][52][53][56][57][58][63][64][65][66][67][68][69]71,[73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90]92,…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Milone

Manigrasso

Anoldo

et al. 2022

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abdominal adhesions are a risk factor for conversion to open surgery. An advantage of robotic surgery is the lower rate of unplanned conversions. A systematic review was conducted using the terms “laparoscopic” and “robotic”. Inclusion criteria were: comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic surgery; reporting data on conversion to open surgery for each group due to adhesions and studies including at least five patients in each group. The main outcomes were the conversion rates due to adhesions and surgeons’ expertise (novice vs. expert). The meta-analysis included 70 studies from different surgical specialities with 14,329 procedures (6472 robotic and 7857 laparoscopic). The robotic approach was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12–2.10, p = 0.007). The analysis of the procedures performed by “expert surgeons” showed a statistically significant difference in favour of robotic surgery (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.03–2.12, p = 0.03). A reduced conversion rate due to adhesions with the robotic approach was observed in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.20–5.72, p = 0.02). The robotic approach could be a valid option in patients with abdominal adhesions, especially in the subgroup of those undergoing colorectal cancer resection performed by expert surgeons.

show abstract

The da Vinci Xi system for robotic total/subtotal colectomy vs. conventional laparoscopy: short-term outcomes

Cited by 14 publications

References 13 publications

Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program

Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program

Entirely Robot-assisted Total Colectomy/Total Proctocolectomy Compared With a Laparoscopic Approach

The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About