Evaluation of da Vinci Nissen fundoplication clinical results and cost minimization

Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic techniques in hiatal hernia and crural repair: a review of current evidence and outcomes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate the implementation of robotic surgery in hiatal hernia and crural repair, based on the existing literature and to compare this approach to other established techniques.

METHODS

We performed a non- systematic literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE on February 25, 2024 for papers published to date focusing on the surgical repair of hiatal hernias using the robotic platform. After eliminating publications based on eligibility criteria, 13 studies were selected for analysis.

RESULTS

Robotic surgery is increasingly utilized in hiatal hernia repair due to its enhanced ergonomics and superior visualization capabilities. Operative times vary, with some studies indicating longer durations for robotic surgery (e.g., Giovannetti et al. demonstrated median operative time of 196 min for robotic compared to 145 min for laparoscopic) while others report shorter times (e.g., Lang F et al. demonstrated 88 min for robotic versus 102 min for laparoscopic). Recurrence rates between robotic and laparoscopic repairs are comparable, with reported recurrence rates of 1.8% for robotic and 1.2% for laparoscopic approaches by Benedix et al. Robotic surgery offers potential advantages, including reduced intraoperative blood loss (e.g., Giovannetti et al. mentioned median blood loss of 20 ml for robotic versus 50 ml for laparoscopic). The length of hospital stay and postoperative complication rates also vary, with some studies suggesting shorter stays and fewer complications for robotic surgery as surgeons become more proficient. Soliman et al. reported a statistically significant reduction in complication rates with robotic surgery (6.3% versus 19.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery presents promising results regarding the length of hospital stay, conversion rate to open surgery and postoperative complication rates when compared to laparoscopy based on the existing literature. Despite the lack of striking differences, robotic hiatal hernia repair is a valid and evolving approach.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic redo antireflux surgery in children: A cost-effectiveness study

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted redo fundoplication has some advantages compared to the laparoscopic approach in adults, although to date there are no studies in children.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was performed among consecutive children who underwent redo antireflux surgery between 2004 and 2020, divided into two groups: LAF group (laparoscopic redo-fundoplication) and RAF group (robotic-assisted redo-fundoplication). Demographics, clinical, intraoperative, postoperative and economic data were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included (10 LAF group; 14 RAF group) without demographic or clinical differences. The RAF group presented lower intraoperative blood loss (52 ± 19 vs. 145 ± 69 mL; p < 0.021), shorter surgery time (135 ± 39 vs. 179 ± 68 min; p = 0.009) and shorter length of hospital stay (median 3 days [2-4] vs. 5 days [3-7]; p = 0.002). The RAF group presented a higher rate of symptom improvement (85.7% vs. 60%; p = 0.192) and lower overall associated economic costs (25 800$ vs. 45 500$; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted redo antireflux surgery may offer several benefits over the laparoscopic approach. Prospective studies are still needed.

Proctored adoption of robotic hiatus hernia surgery: outcomes and learning curves in a high-volume UK centre

BACKGROUND

The adoption of new surgical technologies is inevitably accompanied by a learning curve. With the increasing adoption of robotic techniques in benign foregut surgery, it is imperative to define optimal learning pathways, to ensure a clinically safe introduction of such a technique. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve for robotic hiatal hernia repair with a pre-defined adoption process and proctoring.

METHODS

The learning curve was assessed in four surgeons in a high-volume tertiary referral centre, performing over a 100 hiatal hernia repairs annually. The robotic adoption process included simulation-based training and a multi-day wet lab-based course, followed by robotic operations proctored by robotic upper GI experts. CUSUM analysis was performed to assess changes in operating time in sequential cases.

RESULTS

Each surgeon (A, B, C and D) performed between 22 and 32 cases, including a total of 109 patients. Overall, 40 cases were identified as 'complex' (36.7%), including 16 revisional cases (16/109, 14.7%). With CUSUM analysis inflection points for operating time were seen after 7 (surgeon B) to 15 cases (surgeon B).

CONCLUSION

The learning curve for robotic laparoscopic fundoplication may be as little as 7-15 cases in the setting of a clearly organized learning pathway with proctoring. By integrating these organized learning pathways learning curves may be shortened, ensuring patient safety, preventing detrimental outcomes due to longer learning curves, and accelerating adoption and integration of novel surgical techniques.

Laparoscopic versus robotic abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The current evidence is inconclusive on whether robotic or laparoscopic surgery is the optimal platform for minimally invasive surgery. Existing comparisons techniques focus on short-term outcomes only, while potentially being confounded by a lack of standardisation in robotic procedures. There is a pertinent need for an up-to-date comparison between minimally invasive surgical techniques. We aimed to systematically review randomised controlled trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic techniques in major surgery.

METHODS

Embase, Medline and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 13th September 2022. Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic techniques in abdominal and pelvic surgery. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Short-term, health-related quality of life, and long-term, outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies, across thirteen procedures, involving 7364 patients were included. All of the studies reported non-significant differences in mortality between robotic and laparoscopic surgery. In majority of studies, there was no significant difference in complication rate (n = 31/35, 85.6%), length of postoperative stay (n = 27/32, 84.4%), and conversion rate (n = 15/18, 83.3%). Laparoscopic surgery was associated with shorter operative time (n = 16/31, 51.6%) and lower total cost (n = 11/13, 84.6%). Twenty three studies reported on quality of life outcomes; majority (n = 14/23, 60.9%) found no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences between robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery with regards to mortality and morbidity outcomes in the majority of studies. Robotic surgery was frequently associated with longer operative times and higher overall cost. Selected studies found potential benefits in post-operative recovery time, and patient-reported outcomes; however, these were not consistent across procedures and trials, with most studies being underpowered to detect differences in secondary outcomes. Future research should focus on assessing quality of life, and long-term outcomes to further elucidate where the robotic platform could lead to patient benefits, as the technology evolves.

Robotic Surgery and Functional Esophageal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The functional disease of the esophago-gastric junction (EGJ) is one of the most common health problems. It often happens that patients suffering from GERD need surgical management. The laparoscopic fundoplication has been considered the gold standard surgical treatment for functional diseases of the EGJ. The aim of our meta-analysis is to investigate functional outcomes after robotic fundoplication compared with conventional laparoscopic fundoplication. A prospective search of online databases was performed by two independent reviewers using the search string "robotic and laparoscopic fundoplication", including all the articles from 1996 to December 2021. The risk of bias within each study was assessed with the Cochrane ROBINS-I and RoB 2.0 tools. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.4. In addition, sixteen studies were included in the final analysis, involving only four RCTs. The primary endpoints were functional outcomes after laparoscopic (LF) and robotic fundoplication (RF). No significant differences between the two groups were found in 30-day readmission rates (p = 0.73), persistence of symptomatology at follow-up (p = 0.60), recurrence (p = 0.36), and reoperation (p = 0.81). The laparoscopic fundoplication represents the gold standard treatment for the functional disease of the EGJ. According to our results, the robotic approach seems to be safe and feasible as well. Further randomized controlled studies are required to better evaluate the advantages of robotic fundoplication.

Review of SAGES GERD guidelines and recommendations

BACKGROUND

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) developed evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to evaluate guidelines lacking agreement among experts (grades B-D) or lacking support from randomized controlled trials (levels II-III).

METHODS

Six guidelines were chosen for evaluation. A retrospective review of a multicenter database of patients undergoing fundoplication surgery for treatment of GERD between 2015 and 2020 was performed. Patients that underwent a concurrent gastrectomy or were diagnosed with pre-operative achalasia were excluded. Demographics, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative variables were collected. Post-operative outcomes were evaluated based on selected SAGES guidelines. Outcomes were assessed using multivariable regression or stratified analysis for each guideline.

RESULTS

A total of 444 patients from four institutions underwent surgery for the management of GERD with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 16 (13) months. Guidelines supported by our data were (1) robotic repair has similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic repair, (2) outcomes in older patients are similar to outcomes of younger patients undergoing antireflux surgery, and (3) following laparoscopic antireflux surgery, dysphagia has been reported to significantly improve from pre-operative values. Guidelines that were not supported were (1) mesh reinforcement may be beneficial in decreasing the incidence of wrap herniation, (2) a bougie has been found to be effective, and (3) the long-term effectiveness of fundoplication in obese individuals (BMI > 30) has been questioned due to higher failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Many SAGES GERD guidelines not receiving Grade A or Level I recommendation are supported by large, multicenter database findings. However, further studies at low risk for bias are needed to further refine these guidelines.

A systematic review of robot-assisted anti-reflux surgery to examine reporting standards

Robot-assisted anti-reflux surgery (RA-ARS) is increasingly being used to treat refractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow up) Collaboration's framework aims to improve the evaluation of surgical innovation, but the extent to which the evolution of RA-ARS has followed this model is unclear. This study aims to evaluate the standard to which RA-ARS has been reported during its evolution, in relation to the IDEAL framework. A systematic review from inception to June 2020 was undertaken to identify all primary English language studies pertaining to RA-ARS. Studies of paraoesophageal or giant hernias were excluded. Data extraction was informed by IDEAL guidelines and summarised by narrative synthesis. Twenty-three studies were included: two case reports, five case series, ten cohort studies and six randomised controlled trials. The majority were single-centre studies comparing RA-ARS and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Eleven (48%) studies reported patient selection criteria, with high variability between studies. Few studies reported conflicts of interest (30%), funding arrangements (26%), or surgeons' prior robotic experience (13%). Outcome reporting was heterogeneous; 157 distinct outcomes were identified. No single outcome was reported in all studies.The under-reporting of important aspects of study design and high degree of outcome heterogeneity impedes the ability to draw meaningful conclusions from the body of evidence. There is a need for further well-designed prospective studies and randomised trials, alongside agreement about outcome selection, measurement and reporting for future RA-ARS studies.

More work is needed on cost-utility analyses of robotic-assisted surgery

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively analyze the cost-utility of robotic surgery in clinical practice and to investigate the reporting and methodological quality of the related evidence.

METHODS

Data on cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of robotic surgery were collected in seven electronic databases from the inception to July 2021. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CHEERs and QHES checklists. A systematic review was performed with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Thirty-one CUAs of robotic surgery were eligible. Overall, the identified CUAs were fair to high quality, and 63% of the CUAs ranked the cost-utility of robotic surgery as "favored," 32% categorized as "reject," and the remaining 5% ranked as "unclear." Although a high heterogeneity was present in terms of the study design among the included CUAs, most studies (81.25%) consistently found that robotic surgery was more cost-utility than open surgery for prostatectomy (ICER: $6905.31/QALY to $26240.75/QALY; time horizon: 10 years or lifetime), colectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), knee arthroplasty (ICER: $1134.22/QALY to $1232.27/QALY; time horizon: lifetime), gastrectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), spine surgery (ICER: $17707.27/QALY; time horizon: 1 year), and cystectomy (ICER: $3154.46/QALY; time horizon: 3 months). However, inconsistent evidence was found for the cost-utility of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Fair or high-quality evidence indicated that robotic surgery is more cost-utility than open surgery, while it remains inconclusive whether robotic surgery is more cost-utility than laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy. Thus, an additional evaluation is required.

The Evidence Behind Robot-Assisted Abdominopelvic Surgery : A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Use of robot-assisted surgery has increased dramatically since its advent in the 1980s, and nearly all surgical subspecialties have adopted it. However, whether it has advantages compared with laparoscopy or open surgery is unknown.

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of evidence and outcomes of robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopy and open surgery in adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials that compared robot-assisted abdominopelvic surgery with laparoscopy, open surgery, or both.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently extracted study data and risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 50 studies with 4898 patients were included. Of the 39 studies that reported incidence of Clavien-Dindo complications, 4 (10%) showed fewer complications with robot-assisted surgery. The majority of studies showed no difference in intraoperative complications, conversion rates, and long-term outcomes. Overall, robot-assisted surgery had longer operative duration than laparoscopy, but no obvious difference was seen versus open surgery.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity was present among and within the included surgical subspecialties, which precluded meta-analysis. Several trials may not have been powered to assess relevant differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There is currently no clear advantage with existing robotic platforms, which are costly and increase operative duration. With refinement, competition, and cost reduction, future versions have the potential to improve clinical outcomes without the existing disadvantages.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None. (PROSPERO: CRD42020182027).

Association between Functional Brain Network Metrics and Surgeon Performance and Distraction in the Operating Room

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to examine (electroencephalogram) EEG features that represent dynamic changes in the functional brain network of a surgical trainee and whether these features can be used to evaluate a robot assisted surgeon's (RAS) performance and distraction level in the operating room.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electroencephalogram (EEG) data were collected from three robotic surgeons in an operating room (OR) via a 128-channel EEG headset with a frequency of 500 samples/second. Signal processing and network neuroscience algorithms were applied to the data to extract EEG features. The SURG-TLX and NASA-TLX metrics were subjectively evaluated by a surgeon and mentor at the end of each task. The scores given to performance and distraction metrics were used in the analyses here. Statistical test data were utilized to select EEG features that have a significant relationship with surgeon performance and distraction while carrying out a RAS surgical task in the OR.

RESULTS

RAS surgeon performance and distraction had a relationship with the surgeon's functional brain network metrics as recorded throughout OR surgery. We also found a significant negative Pearson correlation between performance and the distraction level (-0.37, p-value < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The method proposed in this study has potential for evaluating RAS surgeon performance and the level of distraction. This has possible applications in improving patient safety, surgical mentorship, and training.

Surgical treatment of GERD: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has a high worldwide prevalence in adults and children. There is uncertainty regarding medical versus surgical therapy and different surgical techniques. This review assessed outcomes of antireflux surgery versus medical management of GERD in adults and children, robotic versus laparoscopic fundoplication, complete versus partial fundoplication, and minimal versus maximal dissection in pediatric patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (2004-2019) to identify randomized control and non-randomized comparative studies. Two independent reviewers screened for eligibility. Random effects meta-analysis was performed on comparative data. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Newcastle Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

From 1473 records, 105 studies were included. Most had high or uncertain risk of bias. Analysis demonstrated that anti-reflux surgery was associated with superior short-term quality of life compared to PPI (Std mean difference =  - 0.51, 95%CI  - 0.63, - 0.40, I² = 0%) however short-term symptom control was not significantly superior (RR = 0.75, 95%CI 0.47, 1.21, I² = 82%). A proportion of patients undergoing operative treatment continue PPI treatment (28%). Robotic and laparoscopic fundoplication outcomes were similar. Compared to total fundoplication, partial fundoplication was associated with higher rates of prolonged PPI usage (RR = 2.06, 95%CI 1.08, 3.94, I² = 45%). There was no statistically significant difference for long-term symptom control (RR = 0.94, 95%CI 0.85, 1.04, I² = 53%) or long-term dysphagia (RR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.52, 1.02, I² = 0%). Ien, minimal dissection during fundoplication was associated with lower reoperation rates than maximal dissection (RR = 0.21, 95%CI 0.06, 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence regarding the optimal treatment of GERD often suffers from high risk of bias. Additional high-quality randomized control trials may further inform surgical decision making in the treatment of GERD.

Non-active implantable device treating acid reflux with a new dynamic treatment approach: 1-year results : RefluxStop™ device; a new method in acid reflux surgery obtaining CE mark

Background

RefluxStop™ is an implantable, non-active, single use device used in the laparoscopic treatment of GERD. RefluxStop™ aims to block the movement of the LES up into the thorax and keep the angle of His in its original, anatomically correct position. This new device restores normal anatomy, leaving the food passageway unaffected.

Methods

In a prospective, single arm, multicentric clinical investigation analyzing safety and effectiveness of the RefluxStop™ device to treat GERD, 50 subjects with chronic GERD were operated using a standardized surgical technique between December 2016 and September 2017. They were followed up for 1 year (CE-mark investigation 6-months). Primary safety outcome was prevalence of serious adverse events related to the device, and primary effectiveness outcome reduction of GERD symptoms based on GERD-HRQL score. Secondary outcomes were prevalence of adverse events other than serious adverse events, reduction of total acid exposure time in 24-h pH monitoring, and reduction in average daily PPI usage and subject satisfaction.

Results

There were no serious adverse events related to the device. Average GERD-HRQL total score at 1 year improved 86% from baseline (p < 0.001). 24-h pH monitoring compared to baseline showed a mean reduction percentage of overall time with pH < 4 from 16.35 to 0.80% at the 6-month visit (p < 0.001), with 98% of subjects showing normal 24-h pH. At 1 year: No new cases of dysphagia were recorded, present in 2 subjects, which existed already at baseline. Regular daily PPI usage occurred in all 50 subjects at baseline. At 1-year follow-up, only 1 subject took regular daily PPIs due to a too low placement of the device thereby prohibiting its function. None or minimal occasional episodes of regurgitation occurred in 97.8% of evaluable subjects. Gas bloating disappeared in 30 subjects and improved in 7 subjects.

Conclusion

The new principle of RefluxStop™ is safe and effective to treat GERD according to investigation results. At 1-year follow-up, both the GERD-HRQL score and 24-h pH monitoring results indicate success for the new treatment principle. In addition, with the dynamic treatment for acid reflux, which avoids compressing the food passageway, prevalence of dysphagia and gas bloating are significantly reduced.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02759094. Registered 3 May, 2016,

Robotic Fundoplication for Large Paraesophageal Hiatal Hernias

Purpose:

Laparoscopic fundoplication is now a cornerstone in the treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) with sliding hernia. The best outcomes are achieved in those patients who have some response to medical treatment compared to those who do not. Robotic fundoplication is considered a novel approach in treating GERD with large paraesophageal hiatal hernias. Our goal was to examine the feasibility of this technique.

Methods:

Seventy patients (23 males and 47 females) with mean age 64 y old (22–92), preoperatively diagnosed with a large paraesophageal hiatal hernia, were treated with a robotic approach. Biosynthetic tissue absorbable mesh was applied for hiatal closure reinforcement. Fifty-eight patients underwent total fundoplication, 11 patients had partial fundoplication, and one patient had a Collis-Nissen fundoplication for acquired short esophagus.

Results:

All procedures were completed robotically, without laparoscopic or open conversion. Mean operative time was 223 min (180–360). Mean length of stay was 38 h (24–96). Median follow-up was 29 mo (7–51). Moderate postoperative dysphagia was noted in eight patients, all of which resolved after 3 mo without esophageal dilation. No mesh-related complications were detected. There were six hernia recurrences. Four patients were treated with redo-robotic fundoplication, and two were treated medically.

Conclusions:

The success of robotic fundoplication depends on adhering to a few important technical principles. In our experience, the robotic surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease with large paraesophageal hernias may afford the surgeon increased dexterity and is feasible with comparable outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopic approaches.

Safety of robotic assisted laparoscopic recurrent paraesophageal hernia repair: insights from a large single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic repair of recurrent as opposed to primary paraesophageal hernias (PEHs) are historically associated with increased peri-operative complication rates, worsened outcomes, and increased conversion rates. The robotic platform may aid surgeons in these complex revision procedures. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic (RAL) repair of recurrent as opposed to primary PEHs.

METHODS

Patients undergoing RAL primary and recurrent PEH repairs from 2009 to 2017 at a single institution were reviewed. Demographics, use of mesh, estimated blood loss, intra-operative complications, conversion rates, operative time, rates of esophageal/gastric injury, hospital length of stay, re-admission/re-operation rates, recurrence, dysphagia, gas bloat, and pre- and post-operative proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use were analyzed. Analysis was accomplished using Chi-square test/Fischer's exact test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

There were 298 patients who underwent RAL PEH repairs (247 primary, 51 recurrent). They were followed for a median (interquartile range) of 120 (44, 470) days. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between groups. Patients in the recurrent PEH group had longer operative times, increased use of mesh, and increased length of hospital stay. They were also less likely to undergo fundoplication. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, incidence of intra-operative complications, re-admission rates, incidence of post-operative dysphagia and gas bloat, and incidence of post-operative PPI use. There were no conversions to open operative intervention or gastric/esophageal injury/leaks.

CONCLUSIONS

Although repair of recurrent PEHs are historically associated with worse outcomes, in this series, RAL recurrent PEH repairs have similar peri-operative and post-operative outcomes as compared to primary PEH repairs. Whether this is secondary to the potential advantages afforded by the robotic platform deserves further study.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a comprehensive cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery is still debatable. Robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair has no clear clinical benefit over laparoscopic repair. We performed a comprehensive cost-analysis comparison between the two approaches for evaluation of their cost-effectiveness in a large healthcare system in the Western United States.

METHODS

Health records in 32 hospitals were queried for procedural costs of inguinal hernia repairs between January 2015 and March 2017. Elective robotic-assisted or laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repairs were included. Cost calculations were done using a utilization-based costing model. Total cost included: fixed cost, which comprises medical device and personnel costs, and variable cost, which comprises disposables and reusable instruments costs. Other outcome measures were length of stay (LOS), conversion to open, and operative times. Statistics were done using t test for continuous variables and χ² test for categorical variables. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 2405 cases, 734 robotic-assisted (633 Primary: 101 recurrent) and 1671 laparoscopic (1471 Primary: 200 recurrent), were included. The average total cost was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the robotic-assisted group ($5517) compared to the laparoscopic group ($3269). However, the average laparoscopic variable cost ($1105) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the robotic-assisted cost ($933). Whereas there was no significant difference between the two groups for LOS and conversion to open, average operative times were significantly higher in the robotic-assisted group (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis for primary and recurrent inguinal hernias matched the overall results.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair has a significantly higher cost and significantly longer operative times, compared to the laparoscopic approach. The study has shown that only fixed cost contributes to the cost difference between the two approaches. Medical device cost plus the longer operative times are the main factors driving the cost difference. Laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repair is more cost-effective compared to a robotic-assisted approach.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Importance

This review provides a comprehensive comparison of treatment outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RLS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) based on randomly-controlled trials (RCTs).

Objectives

We employed RCTs to provide a systematic review that will enable the relevant community to weigh the effectiveness and efficacy of surgical robotics in controversial fields on surgical procedures both overall and on each individual surgical procedure.

Evidence review

A search was conducted for RCTs in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from 1981 to 2016. Among a total of 1,517 articles, 27 clinical reports with a mean sample size of 65 patients per report (32.7 patients who underwent RLS and 32.5 who underwent CLS), met the inclusion criteria.

Findings

CLS shows significant advantages in total operative time, net operative time, total complication rate, and operative cost (p < 0.05 in all cases), whereas the estimated blood loss was less in RLS (p < 0.05). As subgroup analyses, conversion rate on colectomy and length of hospital stay on hysterectomy statistically favors RLS (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Despite higher operative cost, RLS does not result in statistically better treatment outcomes, with the exception of lower estimated blood loss. Operative time and total complication rate are significantly more favorable with CLS.

Two years of experience with robot-assisted anti-reflux surgery: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Robot-assisted anti-reflux surgery (RAAS) is an alternative to conventional laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (CLAS). The purpose of this study was to evaluate initial Danish experiences with robot-assisted anti-reflux surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery incorporating follow-up and evaluation of possible learning curve.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients undergoing primary RAAS or CLAS at The Department of Surgery A, Odense University Hospital and The Department of General Surgery, Kolding Hospital from April 2013 to April 2015 was included. Demographic data, comorbidity, docking time, length of procedure, type of fundic wrap as well as perioperative complications and postoperative complications, need for reoperation or any upper gastrointestinal endoscopy from surgery to final follow-up was retrospectively extracted from patient records.

RESULTS

103 patients were included in this study. 39 patients underwent RAAS and 64 patients underwent CLAS. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic data or comorbidities except distribution of heart disease (RAAS: 5.1% vs. CLAS: 18.8%, p = 0.05) and previous abdominal surgery (RAAS: 28.2% vs. CLAS: 48.4%, p = 0.04). Duration of surgery was significantly increased in patients undergoing RAAS (RAAS: 135 ± 27 min vs. CLAS: 86 ± 19 min, p < 0.01). There was no statistical significant difference in intraoperative complications (p = 0.20), 30-day postoperative complication rate (p = 0.20) or mortality (p = 1.00). At follow-up in April 2016, there were no statistically significant differences in patients having undergone upper endoscopy postoperatively (p = 0.92), the use of anti-secretory drugs (p = 0.46) or patients having undergone reoperation (p = 0.60). Reasons for reoperation were significantly dependent on type of fundic wrap with reoperation of Nissen fundoplication being dysphagia and reoperation of Toupet being recurrent reflux (p = 0.008). There was no clearly determined learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

RAAS was safe, feasible and with equal efficacy to CLAS. There were however no particular advantages to performing antireflux surgery as robot-assisted procedures neither intra-operatively nor at follow-up.

Robotic technological aids in esophageal surgery

Robotic technology is an emerging technology that has been developed in order to overcome some limitations of the standard laparoscopic approach, offering a stereoscopic three-dimensional visualization of the surgical field, increased maneuverability of the surgical tools with consequent increased movement accuracy and precision and improved ergonomics. It has been used for the surgical treatment of most benign esophageal disorders. More recently, it has been proposed also for patients with operable esophageal cancer. The current evidence shows that there are no real benefits of the robotic technology over conventional laparoscopy in patients undergoing a fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hiatal closure for giant hiatal hernia, or Heller myotomy for achalasia. A few small studies suggest potential advantages in patients undergoing redo surgery for failed fundoplication or Heller myotomy, but large comparative studies are needed to better clarify the role of the robotic technology in these patients. Robot-assisted esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective in selected patients; however, there are no data showing superiority of this approach over both conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. The short-term and long-term oncologic results of ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are awaited to validate this approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Limited Evidence for Robot-assisted Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To evaluate available evidence on robot-assisted surgery compared with open and laparoscopic surgery.

METHOD

The databases Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing robot-assisted surgery with open and laparoscopic surgery regardless of surgical procedure. Meta-analyses were performed on each outcome with appropriate data material available. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate risk of bias on a study level. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence of the meta-analyses.

RESULTS

This review included 20 studies comprising 981 patients. The meta-analyses found no significant differences between robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery regarding blood loss, complication rates, and hospital stay. A significantly longer operative time was found for robot-assisted surgery. Open versus robot-assisted surgery was investigated in 3 studies. A lower blood loss and a longer operative time were found after robot-assisted surgery. No other difference was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

At this point there is not enough evidence to support the significantly higher costs with the implementation of robot-assisted surgery.

Robotics in general surgery: A systematic cost assessment

The utilisation of robotic-assisted techniques is a novelty in the field of general surgery. Our intention was to examine the up to date available literature on the cost assessment of robotic surgery of diverse operations in general surgery. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched in a systematic way to retrieve the included studies in our review. Thirty-one studies were retrieved, referring on a vast range of surgical operations. The mean cost for robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 2539 to 57,002, 7888 to 16,851 and 1799 to 50,408 Euros, respectively. The mean operative charges ranged from 273.74 to 13,670 Euros. More specifically, for the robotic and laparoscopic gastric fundoplication, the cost ranged from 1534 to 2257 and 657 to 763 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic colectomy, it ranged from 3739 to 17,080 and 3109 to 33,865 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy, ranged from 1163.75 to 1291 and from 273.74 to 1223 Euros, respectively. The mean non-operative costs ranged from 900 to 48,796 from 8347 to 8800 and from 870 to 42,055 Euros, for robotic, open and laparoscopic technique, respectively. Conversions to laparotomy were present in 34/18,620 (0.18%) cases of laparoscopic and in 22/1488 (1.5%) cases of robotic technique. Duration of surgery robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 54.6 to 328.7, 129 to 234, and from 50.2 to 260 min, respectively. The present evidence reveals that robotic surgery, under specific conditions, has the potential to become cost-effective. Large number of cases, presence of industry competition and multidisciplinary team utilisation are some of the factors that could make more reasonable and cost-effective the robotic-assisted technique.

Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy in morbidly obese versus super obese patients

Background and Objectives:

This study evaluates our technique for robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy for morbidly obese and super obese patients and our outcomes.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy at a single center was performed. The procedure was performed with the da Vinci Si HD Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, California). The staple line was imbricated with No. 2-0 polydioxanone in all cases. The super obese (body mass index ≥50 kg/m²) subset of patients was compared with the morbidly obese group in terms of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, operative times, perioperative complications, and excess body weight loss.

Results:

A total of 35 patients (15 female and 20 male patients) with a mean body mass index of 48.17 ± 11.7 kg/m² underwent robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy. Of these patients, 11 were super obese and 24 were morbidly obese. The mean operative time was 116.3 ± 24.7 minutes, and the mean docking time was 8.9 ± 5.4 minutes. Mean blood loss was 19.36 ± 4.62 mL, and there were no complications, conversions, or perioperative deaths. When compared with the morbidly obese patients, the super obese patients showed no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. There was a steep decline in operating room times after 10 cases of robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy.

Conclusion:

This study shows the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy. Robotic assistance might help overcome the operative difficulties encountered in super obese patients. It shows a rapid reduction in operative times with the growing experience of the entire operative team. Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy can be a good procedure by which to introduce robotics in a bariatric surgery center before going on to perform Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and revision procedures.

Robotic surgery: disruptive innovation or unfulfilled promise? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the first 30 years

Background

Robotic surgery has been in existence for 30 years. This study aimed to evaluate the overall perioperative outcomes of robotic surgery compared with open surgery (OS) and conventional minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across various surgical procedures.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from 1990 up to October 2013 with no language restriction. Relevant review articles were hand-searched for remaining studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies (PROs) on perioperative outcomes, regardless of patient age and sex, were included. Primary outcomes were blood loss, blood transfusion rate, operative time, length of hospital stay, and 30-day overall complication rate.

Results

We identified 99 relevant articles (108 studies, 14,448 patients). For robotic versus OS, 50 studies (11 RCTs, 39 PROs) demonstrated reduction in blood loss [ratio of means (RoM) 0.505, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.408–0.602], transfusion rate [risk ratio (RR) 0.272, 95 % CI 0.165–0.449], length of hospital stay (RoM 0.695, 0.615–0.774), and 30-day overall complication rate (RR 0.637, 0.483–0.838) in favour of robotic surgery. For robotic versus MIS, 58 studies (21 RCTs, 37 PROs) demonstrated reduced blood loss (RoM 0.853, 0.736–0.969) and transfusion rate (RR 0.621, 0.390–0.988) in favour of robotic surgery but similar length of hospital stay (RoM 0.982, 0.936–1.027) and 30-day overall complication rate (RR 0.988, 0.822–1.188). In both comparisons, robotic surgery prolonged operative time (OS: RoM 1.073, 1.022–1.124; MIS: RoM 1.135, 1.096–1.173). The benefits of robotic surgery lacked robustness on RCT-sensitivity analyses. However, many studies, including the relatively few available RCTs, suffered from high risk of bias and inadequate statistical power.

Conclusions

Our results showed that robotic surgery contributed positively to some perioperative outcomes but longer operative times remained a shortcoming. Better quality evidence is needed to guide surgical decision making regarding the precise clinical targets of this innovation in the next generation of its use.

Surgical robotics beyond enhanced dexterity instrumentation: a survey of machine learning techniques and their role in intelligent and autonomous surgical actions

PURPOSE

Advances in technology and computing play an increasingly important role in the evolution of modern surgical techniques and paradigms. This article reviews the current role of machine learning (ML) techniques in the context of surgery with a focus on surgical robotics (SR). Also, we provide a perspective on the future possibilities for enhancing the effectiveness of procedures by integrating ML in the operating room.

METHODS

The review is focused on ML techniques directly applied to surgery, surgical robotics, surgical training and assessment. The widespread use of ML methods in diagnosis and medical image computing is beyond the scope of the review. Searches were performed on PubMed and IEEE Explore using combinations of keywords: ML, surgery, robotics, surgical and medical robotics, skill learning, skill analysis and learning to perceive.

RESULTS

Studies making use of ML methods in the context of surgery are increasingly being reported. In particular, there is an increasing interest in using ML for developing tools to understand and model surgical skill and competence or to extract surgical workflow. Many researchers begin to integrate this understanding into the control of recent surgical robots and devices.

CONCLUSION

ML is an expanding field. It is popular as it allows efficient processing of vast amounts of data for interpreting and real-time decision making. Already widely used in imaging and diagnosis, it is believed that ML will also play an important role in surgery and interventional treatments. In particular, ML could become a game changer into the conception of cognitive surgical robots. Such robots endowed with cognitive skills would assist the surgical team also on a cognitive level, such as possibly lowering the mental load of the team. For example, ML could help extracting surgical skill, learned through demonstration by human experts, and could transfer this to robotic skills. Such intelligent surgical assistance would significantly surpass the state of the art in surgical robotics. Current devices possess no intelligence whatsoever and are merely advanced and expensive instruments.

SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA)

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci(®) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is a computer-assisted (robotic) surgical system designed to enable and enhance minimally invasive surgery. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared computer-assisted surgical systems for use by trained physicians in an operating room environment for laparoscopic surgical procedures in general, cardiac, colorectal, gynecologic, head and neck, thoracic and urologic surgical procedures. There are substantial numbers of peer-reviewed papers regarding the da Vinci(®) Surgical System, and a thoughtful assessment of evidence framed by clinical opinion is warranted.

METHODS

The SAGES da Vinci(®) TAVAC sub-committee performed a literature review of the da Vinci(®) Surgical System regarding gastrointestinal surgery. Conclusions by the sub-committee were vetted by the SAGES TAVAC Committee and SAGES Executive Board. Following revisions, the document was evaluated by the TAVAC Committee and Executive Board again for final approval.

RESULTS

Several conclusions were drawn based on expert opinion organized by safety, efficacy, and cost for robotic foregut, bariatric, hepatobiliary/pancreatic, colorectal surgery, and single-incision cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal surgery with the da Vinci(®) Surgical System is safe and comparable, but not superior to standard laparoscopic approaches. Although clinically acceptable, its use may be costly for select gastrointestinal procedures. Current data are limited to the da Vinci(®) Surgical System; further analyses are needed.

Robotic general surgery: current practice, evidence, and perspective

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology commenced to be adopted for the field of general surgery in the 1990s. Since then, the da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has remained by far the most commonly used system in this domain. The da Vinci surgical system is a master-slave machine that offers three-dimensional vision, articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom, and additional software features such as motion scaling and tremor filtration. The specific design allows hand-eye alignment with intuitive control of the minimally invasive instruments. As such, robotic surgery appears technologically superior when compared with laparoscopy by overcoming some of the technical limitations that are imposed on the surgeon by the conventional approach.

PURPOSE

This article reviews the current literature and the perspective of robotic general surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

While robotics has been applied to a wide range of general surgery procedures, its precise role in this field remains a subject of further research. Until now, only limited clinical evidence that could establish the use of robotics as the gold standard for procedures of general surgery has been created. While surgical robotics is still in its infancy with multiple novel systems currently under development and clinical trials in progress, the opportunities for this technology appear endless, and robotics should have a lasting impact to the field of general surgery.

Review of contemporary role of robotics in bariatric surgery

With the rise in a number of bariatric procedures, surgeons are facing more complex and technically demanding surgical situations. Robotic digital platforms potentially provide a solution to better address these challenges. This review examines the published literature on the outcomes and complications of bariatric surgery using a robotic platform. Use of robotics to perform adjustable gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy, roux-en-y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and revisional bariatric procedures (RBP) is assessed. A search on PubMed was performed for the most relevant articles in robotic bariatric surgery. A total of 23 articles was selected and reviewed in this article. The review showed that the use of robotics led to similar or lower complication rate in bariatric surgery when compared with laparoscopy. Two studies found a significantly lower leak rate for robotic gastric bypass when compared to laparoscopic method. The learning curve for RYGB seems to be shorter for robotic technique. Three studies revealed a significantly shorter operative time, while four studies found a longer operative time for robotic technique of gastric bypass. As for the outcomes of RBP, one study found a lower complication rate in robotic arm versus laparoscopic and open arms. Most authors stated that the use of robotics provides superior visualisation, more degrees of freedom and better ergonomics. The application of robotics in bariatric surgery seems to be a safe and feasible option. Use of robotics may provide specific advantages in some situations, and overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Large and well-designed randomised clinical trials with long follow-up are needed to further define the role of digital platforms in bariatric surgery.

European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery

Following an extensive literature search and a consensus conference with subject matter experts the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Robotic surgery is still at its infancy, and there is a great potential in sophisticated electromechanical systems to perform complex surgical tasks when these systems evolve. 2. To date, in the vast majority of clinical settings, there is little or no advantage in using robotic systems in general surgery in terms of clinical outcome. Dedicated parameters should be addressed, and high quality research should focus on quality of care instead of routine parameters, where a clear advantage is not to be expected. 3. Preliminary data demonstrates that robotic system have a clinical benefit in performing complex procedures in confined spaces, especially in those that are located in unfavorable anatomical locations. 4. There is a severe lack of high quality data on robotic surgery, and there is a great need for rigorously controlled, unbiased clinical trials. These trials should be urged to address the cost-effectiveness issues as well. 5. Specific areas of research should include complex hepatobiliary surgery, surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, revisional surgery in bariatric and upper GI surgery, surgery for large adrenal masses, and rectal surgery. All these fields show some potential for a true benefit of using current robotic systems. 6. Robotic surgery requires a specific set of skills, and needs to be trained using a dedicated, structured training program that addresses the specific knowledge, safety issues and skills essential to perform this type of surgery safely and with good outcomes. It is the responsibility of the corresponding professional organizations, not the industry, to define the training and credentialing of robotic basic skills and specific procedures. 7. Due to the special economic environment in which robotic surgery is currently employed special care should be taken in the decision making process when deciding on the purchase, use and training of robotic systems in general surgery. 8. Professional organizations in the sub-specialties of general surgery should review these statements and issue detailed, specialty-specific guidelines on the use of specific robotic surgery procedures in addition to outlining the advanced robotic surgery training required to safely perform such procedures.

A cost evaluation methodology for surgical technologies

OBJECTIVE

To create and validate a micro-costing methodology that surgeons and hospital administrators can use to evaluate the cost of implementing innovative surgical technologies.

METHODS

Our analysis is broken down into several elements of fixed and variable costs which are used to effectively and easily calculate the cost of surgical operations. As an example of application, we use data from 86 robot assisted gastric bypass operations made in our hospital. To validate our methodology, we discuss the cost reporting approaches used in 16 surgical publications with respect to 7 predefined criteria.

RESULTS

Four formulas are created which allow users to import data from their health system or particular situation and derive the total cost. We have established that the robotic surgical system represents 97.53 % of our operating room's medical device costs which amounts to $4320.11. With a mean surgery time of 303 min, personnel cost per operation amounts to $1244.73, whereas reusable instruments and disposable costs are, respectively, $1539.69 and $3629.55 per case. The literature survey demonstrates that the cost of surgery is rarely reported or emphasized, and authors who do cover this concept do so with variable methodologies which make their findings difficult to interpret.

CONCLUSION

Using a micro-costing methodology, it is possible to identify the cost of any new surgical procedure/technology using formulas that can be adapted to a variety of operations and healthcare systems. We hope that this paper will provide guidance for decision makers and a means for surgeons to harmonise cost reporting in the literature.

Detection of Membrane Puncture with Haptic Feedback using a Tip-Force Sensing Needle

This paper presents calibration and user test results of a 3-D tip-force sensing needle with haptic feedback. The needle is a modified MRI-compatible biopsy needle with embedded fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors for strain detection. After calibration, the needle is interrogated at 2 kHz, and dynamic forces are displayed remotely with a voice coil actuator. The needle is tested in a single-axis master/slave system, with the voice coil haptic display at the master, and the needle at the slave end. Tissue phantoms with embedded membranes were used to determine the ability of the tip-force sensors to provide real-time haptic feedback as compared to external sensors at the needle base during needle insertion via the master/slave system. Subjects were able to determine the position of the embedded membranes with significantly better accuracy using FBG tip feedback than with base feedback using a commercial force/torque sensor (p = 0.045) or with no added haptic feedback (p = 0.0024).

Robot-assisted oesophageal and gastric surgery for benign disease: antireflux operations and Heller's myotomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted general surgery operations are being performed more frequently. This review investigates whether robotic assistance results in significant advantages or disadvantages for the operative treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and achalasia.

METHODS

The electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PubMed) were searched for original English language publications for antireflux surgery and Heller's myotomy between January 1990 and December 2013.

RESULTS

Thirty-three publications included antireflux operations and 20 included Heller's myotomy. The publications indicate that the safety and effectiveness of robotic surgery is similar to that of conventional minimally invasive surgery for both operations. The six randomized trials of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic antireflux surgery showed no significant advantages but significantly higher costs for the robotic method. Gastric perforation during non-redo robotic fundoplication occurred in four trials.

CONCLUSIONS

No consistent advantage for robot-assisted antireflux surgery has been demonstrated, and there is an increased cost with current robotic technology. A reported advantage for robotic in reducing the perforation rate during Heller's myotomy for achalasia remains unproven. Gastric perforation during robotic fundoplication may be due to the lack of haptic feedback combined with the superhuman strength of the robot.

Thoracoscopic versus robotic approaches: advantages and disadvantages

The overall advantages of thoracoscopy over thoracotomy in terms of patient recovery have been fairly well established. The use of robotics, however, is a newer and less proven modality in the realm of thoracic surgery. Robotics offers distinct advantages and disadvantages in comparison with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Robotic technology is now used for a variety of complex cardiac, urologic, and gynecologic procedures including mitral valve repair and microsurgical treatment of male infertility. This article addresses the potential benefits and limitations of using the robotic platform for the performance of a variety of thoracic operations.

Robotic Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Since its introduction, the Da Vinci surgical system for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been the subject of much controversy. Several prospective randomized controlled trials, conducted to assess its effectiveness and safety, have revealed differences. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficiency and safety of robotic Nissen fundoplication for GERD.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and OVID-MEDLINE, from 1950 to the present, with daily updates generated by a computer, to identify all published papers on robotic Nissen fundoplication for the treatment of GERD. The meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager Version 5.0. Differences of the overall effect were considered significant at P < 0.05 with a 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI).

RESULTS

Five studies with a collective total of 160 patients were included. Apart from intra-operative and post-operative complications, which were excluded because of incomplete primary data, there were no significant differences in outcomes, including of total operation interval (P = 0.16), effective operation interval (P = 0.95), post-operative dysphagia (P = 0.94), intra-operative conversion (P = 0.94), re-operation (P = 0.43), hospital stay (P = 0.97) and in-hospital costs (P = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

As current data do not clarify the advantages of the Da Vinci surgical system in Nissen fundoplication for GERD, we believe that a large a multi-center controlled trial is warranted.

Robotics in general surgery: an evidence-based review

Since its introduction, robotic surgery has been rapidly adopted to the extent that it has already assumed an important position in the field of general surgery. This rapid progress is quantitative as well as qualitative. In this review, we focus on the relatively common procedures to which robotic surgery has been applied in several fields of general surgery, including gastric, colorectal, hepato-biliary-pancreatic, and endocrine surgery, and we discuss the results to date and future possibilities. In addition, the advantages and limitations of the current robotic system are reviewed, and the advanced technologies and instruments to be applied in the near future are introduced. Such progress is expected to facilitate the widespread introduction of robotic surgery in additional fields and to solve existing problems.

[The Mexican consensus on gastroesophageal reflux disease. Part II]

OBJECTIVE

To update the themes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) from the Mexican Consensus published in 2002.

METHODS

Part I of the 2011 Consensus dealt with the general concepts, diagnosis, and medical treatment of this disease. Part II covers the topics of the endoscopic and surgical treatment of GERD. In this second part, an expert in endoscopy and an expert in GERD surgery, along with the three general coordinators of the consensus, carried out an extensive bibliographic review using the Embase, Cochrane, and Medline databases. Statements referring to the main aspects of endoscopic and surgical treatment of this disease were elaborated and submitted to specialists for their consideration and vote, utilizing the modified Delphi method. The statements were accepted into the consensus if the level of agreement was 67% or higher.

RESULTS

Twenty-five statements corresponding to the endoscopic and surgical treatment of GERD resulted from the voting process, and they are presented herein as Part II of the consensus. The majority of the statements had an average level of agreement approaching 90%.

CONCLUSION

Currently, endoscopic treatment of GERD should not be regarded as an option, given that the clinical results at 3 and 5 years have not demonstrated durability or sustained symptom remission. The surgical indications for GERD are well established; only those patients meeting the full criteria should be candidates and their surgery should be performed by experts.

Update on fundoplication for the treatment of GERD

Rudolph Nissen firstly implemented the idea of surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux more than 55 years ago. Today, laparoscopic fundoplication has become the surgical "golden standard" for the treatment of GERD. However, the initial enthusiasm and increasing number of performed procedures in the early 1990s declined dramatically between 2000 and 2006. Despite its excellent outcome, laparoscopic fundoplication is only offered to a minority of patients who are suffering from GERD. In this article we review the current indications for antireflux surgery, technical and intraoperative aspects of fundoplication, perioperative complications as well as short and long-term outcome. The focus is on the laparoscopic approach as the current surgical procedure of choice.

[Robot technology in the Italian Health-CARE system: cost-efficacy economic analysis]

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology is used in multiple fields of surgery, especially radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the introduction of robotic technology in the Italian Public Heath-care context, from the perspective of the Health Technology Assessment (HTA). An economic analysis that compares the costs and effectiveness of the method was developed. Data were compared with those of the most important international literature, analyzing structural and organizational problems related to the method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of literature on tertiary literature (Health Technology Assessment reports) and secondary (systematic reviews) published since 2002 was conducted. The review was also conducted on more recent primary literature regarding the clinical effectiveness and the economic analysis in the fields of surgery where Da Vinci robot is most promising.

RESULTS

18 studies were selected out of a total of 65 evaluated. The "Break-Even Point" (BEP) is the minimum number of cases needed to be treated in order to achieve a balance between costs and revenues, below which the system is losing money. It was calculated that the total fixed costs are € 378,000 and variable costs are € 3,810 per surgery. Considering that the current value of DRG (Diagnosis-Related Group) refunded by the public Health-care system is actually € 4,553, the BEP would be achieved performing 508 surgeries, so that the robotic technology does not generate neither profit nor loss.

CONCLUSIONS

It is not possible to demonstrate the superiority of robotic surgery in terms of efficacy. The robotic surgery is safe and effective only if performed by surgical teams with relevant experience. Considering the reported case of an Italian University Hospital with public Health-care system refund, the BEP target of 508 radical prostatectomies could be achieved after a few years. The use of the robot in multiple fields on one hand shortens recovery time costs, but on the other hand increases costs due to organizational issues. The value of the DRG refund does not appear adequate to new robotic technology.

Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (CLF) is generally considered the surgical approach of choice for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic fundoplication (RALF) has recently been introduced into laparoscopic clinical practice with the aim of improving surgical performance by eliminating tremors and fatigue. A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed to compare RALF and CLF.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge CPCI-S and The Cochrane Library were searched and the methodological quality of included trials was evaluated. Outcomes evaluated were intraoperative, dysphagia, flatulence, antisecretory medication, satisfaction with intervention, operation time, hospital stay and total cost. Results were pooled in meta-analyses as risk ratios and weighted mean differences (WMD).

RESULTS

Of 221 patients in six RCTs, 111 were allocated to CLF and 110 to RALF. RALF prolonged total time necessary to carry out fundoplication (WMD 3.17 (95% confidence interval. 2.33-4.00) min; P < 0.00001, χ(2) P = 0.25, I(2) = 24%). Operation complication, antisecretory medication, satisfaction with intervention, the time needed for hiatal dissection, the time from incision to completion of sutures, the total operation time and total cost were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcomes from RALF were comparable to CLF approach, but RALF prolonged the operation time. Currently, CLF should be routinely used as costs are lower.

[Study of surplus cost of robotic assistance for radical hysterectomy, versus laparotomy and standard laparoscopy]

OBJECTIVES

The study purpose was to compare the costs among robotic, laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-seven patients underwent robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Cases were performed by three surgeons, at two institutions, and were retrospectively reviewed to perform a cost comparison between all three modalities. We included costs for edible materials in anesthesia and surgery, but costs for staff and indirect financial expenses were excluded. Those data are compared to open and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy data.

RESULTS

The average cost for robotic assistance presented a surplus of 1796 euros compare to laparotomy and 1313 euros compare to standard laparoscopy in 2008, and 1320 and 837 euros respectively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The average cost for radical hysterectomy was highest for robotic, followed by standard laparoscopy, and least for laparotomy. However, over only 2 years of use, this difference tends to decrease. Medico-economic impact is the main restraint for robotic assistance development, and needs to be assessed permanently.

Twenty years of laparoscopic fundoplication for GERD

The first laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication was performed 20 years ago. Surgical management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) should be offered only to appropriately studied and selected patients, with the ultimate aim of improving the well-being of the individual, the "quality of life." The choice of fundoplication should be dictated by the surgeon's preference and experience.