Surgeon workload and motion efficiency with robot and human laparoscopic camera control

被引:28
作者
Kondraske, GV
Hamilton, EC
Scott, DJ
Fischer, CA
Tesfay, ST
Taneja, R
Brown, RJ
Jones, DB
机构
[1] Univ Texas, SW Med Ctr, SW Ctr Minimally Invas Surg, Dept Surg, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
[2] Univ Texas, Human Performance Inst, Arlington, TX 76019 USA
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2002年 / 16卷 / 11期
关键词
robot; laparoscopy; motion; efficiency; performance; camera control;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-001-8272-x
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Surgeons are now being assisted by robotic systems in a wide range of laparoscopic procedures. Some reports have suggested that robot-assisted camera control (RACC) may be superior to a human driver in terms of quality of view and directional precision, as well as long-term cost savings. Therefore, we setout to investigate the impact of RACC of surgeon motion efficiency. Methods: Twenty pigs were randomized to undergo a standardized laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with either a human or RACC system, the AESOP 2000. All procedures were performed by the same surgical fellow. Time was recorded for dissection and suture phases. Inertial motion sensors were used to monitor both the surgeon's hands and the camera. Digitized data were analyzed to produce summary measures related to overall motion. Results: The operative times were slightly longer with RACC (mean 80.2 +/- 20.6 vs 73.1 +/- 15.4 min, not significant). With regard to operative times and surgeon motion measures, the only statistically significant differences were for setup and breakdown times, which contributed < 15% to the total time for the procedure. Conclusion: In terms of impact on surgeon motion efficiency and operative time under normal surgical conditions, RACC is essentially the same as an expert. human driver. However, careful planning and structuring of the surgical suite may yield some small gains in operative time.
引用
收藏
页码:1523 / 1527
页数:5
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery [J].
Berguer, R ;
Forkey, DL ;
Smith, WD .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1999, 13 (05) :466-468
[2]  
Cadière GB, 1999, ANN CHIR, V53, P137
[3]   ROBOTIC INTERACTIVE LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY [J].
GAGNER, M ;
BEGIN, E ;
HURTEAU, R ;
POMP, A .
LANCET, 1994, 343 (8897) :596-597
[4]   ROBOTICS FOR HEALTH-CARE - A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE [J].
KASSLER, M .
ROBOTICA, 1993, 11 :495-516
[5]   COMPARISON OF ROBOTIC VERSUS HUMAN LAPAROSCOPIC CAMERA CONTROL [J].
KAVOUSSI, LR ;
MOORE, RG ;
ADAMS, JB ;
PARTIN, AW .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1995, 154 (06) :2134-2136
[6]  
KONDRASKE GV, 2000, BIOMEDICAL ENG HDB
[7]   Robotically assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis in a porcine model: A pilot study [J].
Margossian, H ;
Garcia-Ruiz, A ;
Falcone, T ;
Goldberg, JM ;
Attaran, M ;
Miller, JH ;
Gagner, M .
JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES-PART A, 1998, 8 (02) :69-73
[8]   Self-guided robotic camera control for laparoscopic surgery compared with human camera control [J].
Omote, K ;
Feussner, H ;
Ungeheuer, A ;
Arbter, K ;
Wei, GQ ;
Siewert, JR ;
Hirzinger, G .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1999, 177 (04) :321-324
[9]   Human vs robotic organ retraction during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication [J].
Poulose, BK ;
Kutka, MF ;
Mendoza-Sagaon, M ;
Barnes, AC ;
Yang, C ;
Taylor, RH ;
Talamini, MA .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1999, 13 (05) :461-465
[10]   ROBOTICALLY ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY - FROM CONCEPT TO DEVELOPMENT [J].
SACKIER, JM ;
WANG, Y .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1994, 8 (01) :63-66