Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication in an infant pig model

Evaluation of the Versius Robotic Surgical System for Procedures in Small Cavities

Background: The Versius^® is a recently approved robotic surgical system for general surgery procedures in adults. Before any application in children, data of its feasibility and safety in small cavities has to be compiled, beginning with inanimate models. Therefore, the aim of this preclinical study was to assess the Versius^® system for its performance in small boxes simulating small body cavities. Methods: In total, 8 cardboard boxes of decreasing volumes (15.75 L to 106 mL) were used. The procedures, two single stitches with two square knots each, were performed in every box, starting in the largest and consecutively exchanging the box to the next smaller one. The evaluation included procedure time, port placement and pivot point setup, arrangement of the robotic arms and instrumentation, amount of internal and external instrument–instrument collisions and instrument–box collisions. Results: All procedures could be successfully performed in all boxes. The procedure time decreased due to the learning curve in the first four boxes (15.75 to 1.87 L) and consecutively increased from boxes of 1.22 L up to the smallest box with the dimensions of 4.4 × 4.9 × 4.9 cm³. This may be based on the progress of complexity of the procedures in small cavities, which is also depicted by the synchronous increase of the internal instrument–instrument and instrument–box collisions. Conclusion: With the use of the Versius^® robotic surgical system, we were able to perform robotic reconstructive procedures, such as intracorporal suturing and knot tying, in cavities as small as 106 mL. Whether this system is comparable or even superior to conventional laparoscopic surgery in small cavities, such as in children, has to be evaluated. Furthermore, before any application in newborns or infants, ongoing evaluation of this system should be performed in a live animal model.

Evaluation of a new robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical system for procedures in small cavities

No data exists concerning the application of a new robotic system with 3-mm instruments (Senhance™, Transenterix, Milano, Italy) in small cavities. Therefore, the aim of this study was to test the system for its performance of intracorporal suturing in small boxes simulating small body cavities. Translucent plastic boxes of decreasing volumes (2519-90 ml) were used. The procedures (two single stitches, each with two consecutive surgical square knots) were performed by a system-experienced and three system-inexperienced surgeons in each box, starting within the largest box, consecutively exchanging the boxes into smaller ones. With this approach, the total amount of procedures performed by each surgeon increased with decreasing volume of boxes being operated in. Outcomes included port placement, time, task completion, internal and external instrument/instrument collisions and instrument/box collisions. The procedures could be performed in all boxes. The operating time decreased gradually in the first three boxes (2519-853 ml), demonstrating a learning curve. The increase of operating time from boxes of 599 ml and lower may be attributed to the increased complexity of the procedure in small cavities as in the smallest box with the dimensions of 2.9 × 6.3 × 4.9 cm. This is also reflected by the parallel increase of internal instrument-instrument collisions. With the introduction of 3-mm instruments in a new robotic surgical system, we were able to perform intracorporal suturing and knot tying in cavities as small as 90 ml. Whether this system is comparable to conventional three-port 3-mm laparoscopic surgery in small cavities-such as in pediatric surgery-has to be evaluated in further studies.

Transfer and priming of surgical skills across minimally invasive surgical platforms

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) uses 3-dimensional visualization and wristed instruments that provide more degrees of freedom than rigid traditional laparoscopic (TLS) instrumentation. These features have been touted to improve accuracy and efficiency during surgical task performance. Little is known, however, about the transferability of skills between the two platforms or whether task performance on one platform primes surgeons for task performance on the other.

METHODS

Twenty-six subjects naïve to RALS were recruited to perform three Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery tasks on both TLS and RALS platforms: peg transfer, pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing. All tasks were performed within Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery testing parameters and repeated three times by each subject on each platform. Platform and task order were randomized. Errors in task performance were defined as drops in the peg transfer task, faults 5 mm or more from the defined pattern during PC, and faults greater than 1 mm in suture placement from the defined points in intracorporeal suturing. Mean completion times and mean errors per trial (EPT) were calculated for each task on both platforms. Results were compared between those who performed TLS first (LF) and those who performed RALS first (RF) using unpaired Student's t-test (P < 0.05 considered statistically significant).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in task completion time were noted between the LF and RF groups. RF subjects had fewer errors during robotic PC than LF subjects (1.02 EPT versus 1.86 EPT, respectively; P = 0.02). No other differences in task quality were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

In surgeon's naïve to RALS, there is no evidence that skills acquired on RALS or TLS platforms are transferable to the other platform or that performing tasks on one platform primes a subject for task performance on the other. Performing TLS PC may have had a negative impact on subsequent RALS PC performance. These findings suggest that distinct programs for skills acquisition are necessary for both the TLS and RALS platforms.