Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy - A comparative study

被引:50
作者
Nio, D [1 ]
Bemelman, WA [1 ]
Busch, ORC [1 ]
Vrouenraets, BC [1 ]
Gouiva, DJ [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Surg, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2004年 / 18卷 / 03期
关键词
robot; laparoscopic cholecystectomy; time-action analysis;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-003-9133-6
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The efficacy of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) was compared with robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy (RLC). Surgical trainees performed the LC to avoid the surgeon's experience bias. Methods: Two surgical trainees performed 10 CLCs and 10 RLCs at random with a Zeus-Aesop Surgical Robotic System. The primary efficacy parameters were the total time and the number of actions involved in the procedure. The secondary parameters were setup and dissection times, and the number of grasping and dissection actions. Surgical complications were evaluated. Results: For CLC and RLC, respectively, the total times were 95.4 +/- 28 min and 123.5 +/- 33.3 min and the total actions were 420 +/- 176.3 and 363.5 +/- 158.2. For CLC, the times required for setup (21 +/- 10.4 min) and dissection (50.2 +/- 17.7 min) were less than for RLC (33.8 +/- 11.3 min and 72 +/- 24.3 min, respectively). The numbers of grasping and dissection actions were not significantly different: 41.4 +/- 26.5 and 378 +/- 173.7, respectively, for CLC versus 48.9 +/- 27 and 314.6 +/- 141.9, respectively, for RLC. Conclusion: Although feasible, RLC requires significantly more time than CLC because of slower performed actions.
引用
收藏
页码:379 / 382
页数:4
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   A comparison of robot-assisted versus manually constructed endoscopic coronary anastomosis [J].
Boyd, WD ;
Desai, ND ;
Kiaii, B ;
Rayman, R ;
Menkis, AH ;
McKenzie, FN ;
Novick, RJ .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2000, 70 (03) :839-842
[2]  
Cadière GB, 2001, WORLD J SURG, V25, P1467
[3]   Evaluation of telesurgical (robotic) NISSEN fundoplication [J].
Cadière, GB ;
Himpens, J ;
Vertruyen, M ;
Bruyns, J ;
Germay, O ;
Leman, G ;
Izizaw, R .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2001, 15 (09) :918-923
[4]   Initial prospective multicenter clinical trial of robotically-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting [J].
Damiano, RJ ;
Tabaie, HA ;
Mack, MJ ;
Edgerton, JR ;
Mullangi, C ;
Graper, WP ;
Prasad, SM .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2001, 72 (04) :1263-1268
[5]   Quantitative analysis of the functionality and efficiency of three surgical dissection techniques: A time-motion analysis [J].
Den Boer, KT ;
Straatsburg, IH ;
Schellinger, AV ;
De Wit, LT ;
Dankelman, J ;
Gouma, DJ .
JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES-PART A, 1999, 9 (05) :389-395
[6]   Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study [J].
Falcone, T ;
Goldberg, JM ;
Margossian, H ;
Stevens, L .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2000, 73 (05) :1040-1042
[7]   Manual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks [J].
Garcia-Ruiz, A ;
Gagner, M ;
Miller, JH ;
Steiner, CP ;
Hahn, JF .
ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 1998, 133 (09) :957-961
[8]   Telerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy:: Initial clinical experience with 25 patients [J].
Marescaux, J ;
Smith, MK ;
Fölscher, D ;
Jamali, F ;
Malassagne, B ;
Leroy, J .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2001, 234 (01) :1-7
[9]   Computer-enhanced vs. standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery [J].
Melvin, WS ;
Needleman, B ;
Krause, KR ;
Schneider, C ;
Ellison, EC .
JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2002, 6 (01) :11-15
[10]   Efficiency of manual vs robotical (Zeus) assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks [J].
Nio, D ;
Bemelman, WA ;
den Boer, KT ;
Dunker, MS ;
Gouma, DJ ;
van Gulik, TM .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2002, 16 (03) :412-415