[Robot-assisted operations in visceral surgery].
Roboterassistierte Operationen in der Viszeralchirurgie.
Robotic abdominal surgery
Robotic colorectal surgery
Robotic liver surgery
Robotic pancreatic surgery
Robotic surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract
Journal
Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen
ISSN: 1433-0385
Titre abrégé: Chirurg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 16140410R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
9
1
2020
medline:
18
9
2020
entrez:
9
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Although only a low percentage of abdominal surgical interventions are performed using a robotic platform, the total number has significantly increased in recent years and robotic surgery (RS) is no longer limited only to university hospitals. Despite the increasing popularity and many innovations in the field of robotic surgery with new devices, the data situation is confusing. This review deals with the current areas of application of robotic devices in abdominal surgery and whether there are any advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery (LS). The current international literature was evaluated and is critically discussed with a particular focus on clinical trials. While the disadvantages include high costs and longer times of surgery, the advantages are a stable optical platform and the high mobility even in confined spaces; however, no high-quality, randomized controlled trial in abdominal surgery is currently available that could demonstrate an advantage of RS compared to LS. Although no clear advantages of RS for the patients could so far be demonstrated, it seems to be at least equivalent to LS. Undisputed is the level of comfort for the surgeon. Once the costs of RS can be reduced, LS will probably be replaced for most indications.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although only a low percentage of abdominal surgical interventions are performed using a robotic platform, the total number has significantly increased in recent years and robotic surgery (RS) is no longer limited only to university hospitals. Despite the increasing popularity and many innovations in the field of robotic surgery with new devices, the data situation is confusing.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This review deals with the current areas of application of robotic devices in abdominal surgery and whether there are any advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery (LS).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
METHODS
The current international literature was evaluated and is critically discussed with a particular focus on clinical trials.
RESULTS
RESULTS
While the disadvantages include high costs and longer times of surgery, the advantages are a stable optical platform and the high mobility even in confined spaces; however, no high-quality, randomized controlled trial in abdominal surgery is currently available that could demonstrate an advantage of RS compared to LS.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Although no clear advantages of RS for the patients could so far be demonstrated, it seems to be at least equivalent to LS. Undisputed is the level of comfort for the surgeon. Once the costs of RS can be reduced, LS will probably be replaced for most indications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31912170
doi: 10.1007/s00104-019-01092-8
pii: 10.1007/s00104-019-01092-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
ger
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
190-194Références
J Surg Oncol. 2016 Mar;113(4):397-404
pubmed: 27100025
Surg Endosc. 2017 Oct;31(10):4244-4251
pubmed: 28963583
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017 Dec;27(6):428-433
pubmed: 29211699
Surg Endosc. 2004 May;18(5):790-5
pubmed: 15216862
Surg Endosc. 2018 Aug;32(8):3562-3569
pubmed: 29396754
JAMA. 2017 Oct 24;318(16):1569-1580
pubmed: 29067426
Surg Endosc. 2018 Jun;32(6):2907-2913
pubmed: 29280014
World J Surg. 2018 Mar;42(3):788-805
pubmed: 28799046
Ann Surg. 2018 Feb;267(2):243-251
pubmed: 28549014
Surg Endosc. 2016 Mar;30(3):862-75
pubmed: 26092026
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018 Aug;33(8):1079-1086
pubmed: 29577170
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 27;10(7):e0134062
pubmed: 26214845
Ann Surg. 2016 Jan;263(1):103-9
pubmed: 26020107