Cargando…

Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted surgery offers a solution to fundamental limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, and its use is gaining wide popularity. However, the application of this technology has yet to be established in hepatic surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kandil, Emad, Noureldine, Salem I., Saggi, Bob, Buell, Joseph F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23743372
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680812X13517013317671
_version_ 1782270880384024576
author Kandil, Emad
Noureldine, Salem I.
Saggi, Bob
Buell, Joseph F.
author_facet Kandil, Emad
Noureldine, Salem I.
Saggi, Bob
Buell, Joseph F.
author_sort Kandil, Emad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted surgery offers a solution to fundamental limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, and its use is gaining wide popularity. However, the application of this technology has yet to be established in hepatic surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of our prospectively collected liver surgery database was performed. Over a 6-month period, all consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted hepatic resection for a liver neoplasm were included. Demographics, operative time, and morbidity encountered were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 7 robotic-assisted liver resections were performed, including 2 robotic-assisted single-port access liver resections with the da Vinci-Si Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Sunnyvalle, Calif.) USA. The mean age was 44.6 years (range, 21–68 years); there were 5 male and 2 female patients. The mean operative time (± SD) was 61.4 ± 26.7 minutes; the mean operative console time (± SD) was 38.2 ± 23 minutes. No conversions were required. The mean blood loss was 100.7 mL (range, 10–200 mL). The mean hospital stay (± SD) was 2 ± 0.4 days. No postoperative morbidity related to the procedure or death was encountered. CONCLUSION: Our initial experience with robotic liver resection confirms that this technique is both feasible and safe. Robotic-assisted technology appears to improve the precision and ergonomics of single-access surgery while preserving the known benefits of laparoscopic surgery, including cosmesis, minimal morbidity, and faster recovery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3662746
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36627462013-05-30 Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique Kandil, Emad Noureldine, Salem I. Saggi, Bob Buell, Joseph F. JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted surgery offers a solution to fundamental limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, and its use is gaining wide popularity. However, the application of this technology has yet to be established in hepatic surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of our prospectively collected liver surgery database was performed. Over a 6-month period, all consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted hepatic resection for a liver neoplasm were included. Demographics, operative time, and morbidity encountered were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 7 robotic-assisted liver resections were performed, including 2 robotic-assisted single-port access liver resections with the da Vinci-Si Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Sunnyvalle, Calif.) USA. The mean age was 44.6 years (range, 21–68 years); there were 5 male and 2 female patients. The mean operative time (± SD) was 61.4 ± 26.7 minutes; the mean operative console time (± SD) was 38.2 ± 23 minutes. No conversions were required. The mean blood loss was 100.7 mL (range, 10–200 mL). The mean hospital stay (± SD) was 2 ± 0.4 days. No postoperative morbidity related to the procedure or death was encountered. CONCLUSION: Our initial experience with robotic liver resection confirms that this technique is both feasible and safe. Robotic-assisted technology appears to improve the precision and ergonomics of single-access surgery while preserving the known benefits of laparoscopic surgery, including cosmesis, minimal morbidity, and faster recovery. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3662746/ /pubmed/23743372 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680812X13517013317671 Text en © 2013 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Kandil, Emad
Noureldine, Salem I.
Saggi, Bob
Buell, Joseph F.
Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title_full Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title_fullStr Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title_full_unstemmed Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title_short Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique
title_sort robotic liver resection: initial experience with three-arm robotic and single-port robotic technique
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23743372
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680812X13517013317671
work_keys_str_mv AT kandilemad roboticliverresectioninitialexperiencewiththreearmroboticandsingleportrobotictechnique
AT noureldinesalemi roboticliverresectioninitialexperiencewiththreearmroboticandsingleportrobotictechnique
AT saggibob roboticliverresectioninitialexperiencewiththreearmroboticandsingleportrobotictechnique
AT buelljosephf roboticliverresectioninitialexperiencewiththreearmroboticandsingleportrobotictechnique