Robotic suturing on the FLS model possesses construct validity, is less physically demanding, and is favored by more surgeons compared with laparoscopy

Correlation Study and Predictive Modelling of Ergonomic Parameters in Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aims to continue research on the objective analysis of ergonomic conditions in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), seeking innovative solutions for the analysis and prevention of ergonomic problems in surgical practice.

METHODS

Four different robotic-assisted tasks were performed by groups of surgeons with different surgical experiences. Different wearable technologies were used to record surgeons' posture and muscle activity during surgical practice, for which the correlation between them was analyzed. A predictive model was generated for each task based on the surgeons' level of experience and type of surgery. Two preprocessing techniques (scaling and normalization) and two artificial intelligence techniques were tested.

RESULTS

Overall, a positive correlation between prolonged maintenance of an ergonomically inadequate posture during RAS and increased accumulated muscle activation was found. Novice surgeons showed improved posture when performing RAS compared to expert surgeons. The predictive model obtained high accuracy for cutting, peg transfer, and labyrinth tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

This study expands on the existing ergonomic analysis of the lead surgeon during RAS and develops predictive models for future prevention of ergonomic risk situations. Both posture and muscle loading are highly related to the surgeon's previous experience.

Robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer shows similar clinical efficacy to laparoscopic surgery: A propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, necessitating surgical resection as the sole treatment option. Over the years, there has been a growing adoption of minimally invasive surgical techniques such as robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Robotic surgery represents an innovative modality that effectively addresses the limitations associated with traditional laparoscopic techniques. While previous studies have reported favorable perioperative outcomes for robot-assisted radical resection in rectal cancer patients, further evidence regarding its oncological safety is still warranted.

AIM

To conduct a comparative analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted low anterior resection (LALAR) procedures.

METHODS

The clinical data of 125 patients who underwent robot-assisted low anterior resection (RALAR) and 279 patients who underwent LALAR resection at Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University from December 2019 to November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. After performing a 1:1 propensity score matching, the patients were divided into two groups: The RALAR group and the LALAR group (111 cases in each group). Subsequently, a comparison was made between the short-term outcomes within 30 d after surgery and the 3-year survival outcomes of these two groups.

RESULTS

Compared to the LALAR group, the RALAR group exhibited a significantly earlier time to first flatus [2 (2-2) d vs 3 (3-3) d, P = 0.000], as well as a shorter time to first fluid diet [4 (3-4) d vs 5 (4-6) d, P = 0.001]. Additionally, the RALAR group demonstrated reduced postoperative indwelling catheter time [2 (1-3) d vs 4 (3-5) d, P = 0.000] and decreased length of hospital stay after surgery [5 (5-7) d vs 7(6-8) d, P = 0.009]. Moreover, there was an observed increase in total cost of hospitalization for the RALAR group compared to the LALAR group [10777 (10780-11850) dollars vs 10550 (8766-11715) dollars, P = 0.012]. No significant differences were found in terms of conversion rate to laparotomy or incidence of postoperative complications between both groups. Furthermore, no significant disparities were noted regarding the 3-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery offers potential advantages in terms of accelerated recovery of gastrointestinal and urologic function compared to LALAR resection, while maintaining similar perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes.

Comparative Study of Ergonomics in Conventional and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aims to implement a set of wearable technologies to record and analyze the surgeon's physiological and ergonomic parameters during the performance of conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, comparing the ergonomics and stress levels of surgeons during surgical procedures.

METHODS

This study was organized in two different settings: simulator tasks and experimental model surgical procedures. The participating surgeons performed the tasks and surgical procedures in both laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery in a randomized fashion. Different wearable technologies were used to record the surgeons' posture, muscle activity, electrodermal activity and electrocardiography signal during the surgical practice.

RESULTS

The simulator study involved six surgeons: three experienced (>100 laparoscopic procedures performed; 36.33 ± 13.65 years old) and three novices (<100 laparoscopic procedures; 29.33 ± 8.39 years old). Three surgeons of different surgical specialties with experience in laparoscopic surgery (>100 laparoscopic procedures performed; 37.00 ± 5.29 years old), but without experience in surgical robotics, participated in the experimental model study. The participating surgeons showed an increased level of stress during the robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Overall, improved surgeon posture was obtained during robotic-assisted surgery, with a reduction in localized muscle fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

A set of wearable technologies was implemented to measure and analyze surgeon physiological and ergonomic parameters. Robotic-assisted procedures showed better ergonomic outcomes for the surgeon compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Ergonomic analysis allows us to optimize surgeon performance and improve surgical training.

Feasibility of Robot-Assisted Cytoreductive Surgery With Upper-Abdominal Peritonectomy for Pseudomyxoma Peritonei With Low Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Our study's objective was to provide the method for, and preliminary findings from, robot-assisted cytoreductive surgery (r-CRS) combined with upper-abdominal peritonectomy in pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) with limited peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective pilot study on consecutive patients with PSM secondary to pseudomyxoma peritonei with a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) of under 10 who were indicated for r-CRS combined with upper-abdominal peritectomy. Perioperative and 30-day major morbidity and mortality characteristics were analyzed and compared with cases in which laparoscopic CRS (l-CRS) was performed under the same conditions.

RESULTS

Six patients underwent r-CRS combined with an upper-abdominal partial peritonectomy. Their mean PCI was 4.83. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients. The mean duration of the operation was 156.8 minutes. There was no major complication and no mortality. The mean length of hospital stay after surgery was 6.33 days. r-CRS resulted in less blood loss, a lower C-reactive protein level, and a shorter length of hospital stay that were significantly different compared with those of l-CRS.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the initial technical report of a robotic approach for CRS combined with upper-abdominal peritonectomy. r-CRS with a combined upper-abdominal peritonectomy was shown to be safe and feasible for PMP with limited PSM.

Residents perform better technically, have less stress and workload, and prefer robotic to laparoscopic technique during inanimate simulation

INTRODUCTION

With the widespread adoption of minimally invasive surgery, there is a growing need for surgical residents to be trained by a procedure-specific curriculum. This study aimed to evaluate the technical performance and feedback of surgical residents undergoing the robotic and laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) and gastrojejunostomy (GJ) biotissue modules.

METHODS

A total of 23 PGY-3 surgical residents participated in this study and performed the laparoscopic and robotic HJ and GJ drills, which were recorded and scored by two independent graders using the modified objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS). After completing each drill, all participants filled out the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), Borg Exertion Scale, and Edwards Arousal Rating Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Twenty-two (95.7%) residents had already received fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery certification. Eighteen (78.3%) residents had robotic virtual simulation training and the median (range) number of robotic surgery console experience was 4 (0-30). In the HJ comparison of the six OSATS domains, the robotic system was superior in Gentleness (p = 0.031). In the GJ comparison, the robotic system was superior in Time and Motion (p < 0.001), Instrument Handling (p = 0.001), Flow of Operation (p = 0.002), Tissue Exposure (p = 0.013), and Summary (p < 0.001). Participants answered significantly higher demand scores for laparoscopy on all six facets of NASA-TLX for both HJ and GJ (p < 0.05). The Borg Level of Exertion was > 2 points higher for laparoscopic HJ and GJ (p < 0.001). Residents rated more Nervousness and Anxiety for laparoscopic compared to robotic (p < 0.05) HJ and GJ. Additionally, when asked to score preference for robotic and laparoscopic approach in terms of technique and ergonomics, residents scored robot as better (laparoscopy worse) for both HJ and GJ in both domains.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic surgical system provided a more favorable environment for trainees with less mental and physical burden for minimally invasive HJ and GJ curriculum.

Utilizing Simulation to Evaluate Robotic Skill Acquisition and Learning Decay

BACKGROUND

We aim to evaluate how new robotic skills are acquired and retained by having participants train and retest using exercises on the robotic platform. We hypothesized that participants with a 3-month break from the robotic platform will have less learning decay and increased retention compared with those with a 6-month break.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized trial in which participants voluntarily enrolled and completed an initial training phase to reach proficiency in 9 robot simulator exercises. They were then instructed to refrain from practicing until they retested either 3 or 6 months later. This study was completed at an academic medical center within the general surgery department. Participants were medical students, and junior-level residents with minimal experience in robotic surgery were enrolled. A total of 27 enrolled, and 13 participants completed the study due to attrition.

RESULTS

Overall, intragroup analysis revealed that participants performed better in their retest phase compared with their initial training in terms of attempts to reach proficiency, time for completion, penalty score, and overall score. Specifically, during the first attempt in the retesting phase, the 3-month group did not deviate far from their final attempt in the training phase, whereas the 6-month group experienced significantly worse time to complete and overall score in interrupted suturing {[-4 (-18 to 20) seconds vs. 109 (55 to 118) seconds, P =0.02] [-1.3 (-8 to 1.9) vs. -18.9 (-19.5 to (-15.0)], P =0.04} and 3-arm relay {[3 (-4 to 23) seconds vs. 43 (30 to 50) seconds, P =0.02] [0.4 (-4.6 to 3.1) vs. -24.8 (-30.6 to (-20.3)], P =0.01] exercises. In addition, the 6-month group had a significant increase in penalty score in retesting compared with the 3-month group, which performed similarly to their training phase [3.3 (2.7 to 3.3) vs. 0 (-0.8 to 1.7), P =0.03].

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified statistically significant differences in learning decay, skills retention, and proficiency between 3-month and 6-month retesting intervals on a robotic simulation platform.

Ergonomic Assessment of the Surgeon's Physical Workload During Robot-Assisted Versus Standard Laparoscopy in a French Multicenter Randomized Trial (ROBOGYN-1004 Trial)

BACKGROUND

Standard laparoscopy (SL) is responsible for musculoskeletal disorders in surgeons because of poor ergonomic positions, which could be reduced by robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) owing to the surgeons' seated position. One of the aims of the ROBOGYN-1004 study (NCT01247779) was to evaluate surgeons' workloads during real-time procedures of gynecological oncological surgery.

METHODS

Patients with gynecological cancer eligible for minimally invasive surgery were recruited from 13 French centers between December 2010 and December 2015. Physical workload was evaluated using the Borg scale every hour over the surgery duration and the perception of workload evaluated using NASA-TLX at the end of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 369 patients were recruited, of whom 176 underwent RAL and 193 underwent SL (per-protocol analysis). Posture during SL was significantly more challenging for all body parts except the back. There was an increase in discomfort over time (up to 4 h) for the hands and arms, neck, and legs in SL compared with RAL. Perceived physical activity and abilities were rated higher in SL than in RAL (p < 0.01), whereas perceived personal performance was higher in SL (p < 0.01). Perceived physical effort during surgery was lower in RAL than in SL.

CONCLUSIONS

RAL improves the perception of physical workload. Compared with SL, the perceived effort is lower in RAL regardless of the complexity of the surgery.

Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Rectal Cancer Compared with Open and Laparoscopic Surgery

With increasing trends for the adoption of robotic surgery, many centers are considering changing their practices from open or laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. We compared the outcomes of robot-assisted rectal resection with those of open and laparoscopic surgery. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases until October 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic rectal resection were included. Fifteen RCTs and 11 prospective studies involving 6922 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that robotic surgery has lower blood loss, less surgical site infection, shorter hospital stays, and higher negative resection margins than open resection. Robotic surgery also has lower conversion rates, lower blood loss, lower rates of reoperation, and higher negative circumferential margins than laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery had longer operation times and higher costs than open and laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences in other complications, mortality, and survival between robotic surgery and the open or laparoscopic approach. However, heterogeneity between studies was moderate to high in some analyses. The robotic approach can be the method of choice for centers planning to change from open to minimally invasive rectal surgery. The higher costs of robotic surgery should be considered as a substitute for laparoscopic surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42022381468).

Should All Minimal Access Surgery Be Robot-Assisted? A Systematic Review into the Musculoskeletal and Cognitive Demands of Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgeons are among the most at risk of work-related musculoskeletal health decline because of the physical demands of surgery, which is also associated with cognitive fatigue. Minimally invasive surgery offers excellent benefits to patients but the impact of robotic or laparoscopic surgery on surgeon well-being is less well understood. This work examined the musculoskeletal and cognitive demands of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for 'Muscle strain' AND 'musculoskeletal fatigue' AND 'occupational diseases' OR 'cognitive fatigue' AND 'mental fatigue' OR 'standard laparoscopic surgery' AND 'robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery'. Primary outcomes measured were electromyographic (EMG) activity for musculoskeletal fatigue and questionnaires (NASA-TLX, SMEQ, or Borg CR-10) for cognitive fatigue. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) Guidelines. The study was preregistered on Prospero ID: CRD42020184881.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-eight original titles were identified. Ten studies that were all observational studies were included in the systematic review. EMG activity was consistently lower in robotic than in laparoscopic surgery in the erector spinae and flexor digitorum muscles but higher in the trapezius muscle. This was associated with significantly lower cognitive load in robotic than laparoscopic surgery in 7 of 10 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests a reduction in musculoskeletal demands during robotic surgery in muscles excluding the trapezius, and this is associated with most studies reporting a reduced cognitive load. Robotic surgery appears to have less negative cognitive and musculoskeletal impact on surgeons compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Technical features, perioperative and anatomical outcomes of a standardized suturing pattern for robotic sacrocolpopexy

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Several technical alternatives to repair mesh using laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy exist. We aim to describe the outcomes and surgical technique of robotic-assisted colpo-/cervicosacropexy using a standardized suturing scheme to repair the mesh.

METHODS

We retrospectively reported data of 60 consecutive cases of robotic-assisted colpo-/cervicosacropexy for advanced multicompartmental prolapse using a standardized suturing design. We placed three non-absorbable stitches on the cervix or three absorbable stitches on the apex of the vaginal vault, six long-term absorbable stitches on the anterior vaginal wall deep to the basis of the vesical trigone, six similar posterior stitches with the deeper row of sutures down to the levator ani plane and three non-absorbable stitches on the sacral promontory as the cranial support for Y-shaped polypropylene mesh.

RESULTS

Median operative time was 188 ± 43 min. All the procedures were successfully performed using a Da Vinci Si platform in a three-arm configuration, and no conversion to open or traditional laparoscopic surgery was needed. The length of hospital stay was 1.2 ± 1.7 days, and no readmission within 30 postoperative days was reported. At a follow-up of 12 and 24 months, no case of extrusion or exposure of the mesh occurred, and the retreatment rate was 6.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our suturing technique is safe and effective, with negligible risk of complications and good medium-term results. It is plausible that robotic systems may facilitate precise, accurate and reproducible placement of the stitches, thereby favoring wider diffusion of minimally invasive treatment of advanced prolapse.

To Robot or Not To Robot: The Use of Robotics in Benign Gynecologic Surgery

The use of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery has continued to grow since the Food and Drug Administration approval for robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery in 2005. However, despite this growth in utilization, the data supporting its use in benign gynecologic surgery has not strongly supported its advantages over conventional laparoscopy. Controversy exists between supporters of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopy. This article discusses the current literature regarding the use of robotic-assisted surgery in benign gynecologic surgery.

Are Surgeons Working Smarter or Harder? A Systematic Review Comparing the Physical and Mental Demands of Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgical techniques such as robotic surgical platforms have provided favourable outcomes for patients, but the impact on surgeons is not well described. This systematic review aims to synthesize and evaluate the physical and mental impact of robotic surgery on surgeons compared to standard laparoscopic or open surgery.

METHODS

A search strategy was developed to identify peer-reviewed English articles published from inception to end of December 2019 on the following databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase. The articles were assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa tool.

RESULTS

Of the 6563 papers identified, 30 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis of this review. Most of the included studies presented a high risk of bias. A total of 13 and 21 different physical and mental tools, respectively, were used to examine the impact on surgeons. The most common tool used to measure physical and mental demand were surface electromyography (N = 9) and the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX; N = 8), respectively. Majority of studies showed mixed results for physical (N = 10) and mental impact (N = 7). This was followed by eight and six studies favouring RS over other surgical modalities for physical and mental impact, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Most studies showed mixed physical and mental outcomes between the three surgical modalities. There was a high risk of bias and methodological heterogeneity. Future studies need to correlate mental and physical stress with long-term impact on the surgeons.

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is superior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the initial training for surgical novices in an ex vivo porcine model: a randomized crossover study

Background

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) potentially reduces workload and shortens the surgical learning curve compared to conventional laparoscopy (CL). The present study aimed to compare robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the initial learning phase for novices.

Methods

In a randomized crossover study, medical students (n = 40) in their clinical years performed both LC and RAC on a cadaveric porcine model. After standardized instructions and basic skill training, group 1 started with RAC and then performed LC, while group 2 started with LC and then performed RAC. The primary endpoint was surgical performance measured with Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score, secondary endpoints included operating time, complications (liver damage, gallbladder perforations, vessel damage), force applied to tissue, and subjective workload assessment.

Results

Surgical performance was better for RAC than for LC for total OSATS (RAC = 77.4 ± 7.9 vs. LC = 73.8 ± 9.4; p = 0.025, global OSATS (RAC = 27.2 ± 1.0 vs. LC = 26.5 ± 1.6; p = 0.012, and task specific OSATS score (RAC = 50.5 ± 7.5 vs. LC = 47.1 ± 8.5; p = 0.037). There were less complications with RAC than with LC (10 (25.6%) vs. 26 (65.0%), p = 0.006) but no difference in operating times (RAC = 77.0 ± 15.3 vs. LC = 75.5 ± 15.3 min; p = 0.517). Force applied to tissue was similar. Students found RAC less physical demanding and less frustrating than LC.

Conclusions

Novices performed their first cholecystectomies with better performance and less complications with RAS than with CL, while operating time showed no differences. Students perceived less subjective workload for RAS than for CL. Unlike our expectations, the lack of haptic feedback on the robotic system did not lead to higher force application during RAC than LC and did not increase tissue damage. These results show potential advantages for RAS over CL for surgical novices while performing their first RAC and LC using an ex vivo cadaveric porcine model.

Registration number

researchregistry6029

Graphic abstract

Patients with ineffective esophageal motility benefit from laparoscopic antireflux surgery

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic disorder of the gastrointestinal tract, affecting more than 50% of Americans. The development of GERD may be associated with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). The impact of esophageal motility on outcomes post laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS), including quality of life (QOL), remains to be defined. The purpose of this study is to analyze and compare QOL outcomes following LARS among patients with and without ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).

METHODS

This is a single-institution, retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent LARS, from January 2012 to July 2019, for treatment of GERD at our institution. Patients undergoing revisional surgery were excluded. Patients with normal peristalsis (non-IEM) were distinguished from those with IEM, defined using the Chicago classification, on manometric studies. Four validated QOL surveys were used to assess outcomes: Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related QOL (GERD-HRQL), Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Health-Related QOL (LPR-HRQL), and Swallowing Disorders (SWAL) survey.

RESULTS

203 patients with complete manometric data were identified (75.4% female) and divided into two groups, IEM (n = 44) and non-IEM (n = 159). IEM and Non-IEM groups were parallel in age (58.1 ± 15.3 vs. 62.2 ± 12 years, p = 0.062), body mass index (27.4 ± 4.1 vs. 28.2 ± 4.9 kg/m², p = 0.288), distribution of comorbid disease, sex, and ASA scores. The groups differed in manometry findings and Johnson-DeMeester score (IEM: 38.6 vs. Non-IEM: 24.0, p = 0.023). Patients in both groups underwent similar rates of Nissen fundoplication (IEM: 84.1% vs. Non-IEM: 93.7%, p = 0.061) with greater improvements in dysphagia (IEM: 27.4% vs. 44.2%) in Non-IEM group but comparable benefit in reflux reduction (IEM: 80.6% vs. 72.4%) in both groups at follow-up. There were no differences in postoperative outcomes. Satisfaction rates with LARS were similar between groups (IEM: 80% vs. non-IEM: 77.9%, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with ineffective esophageal motility derive significant benefits in perioperative and QOL outcomes after LARS. Nevertheless, as anticipated, their baseline dysmotility may reduce the degree of improvement in dysphagia rates post-surgery compared to patients with normal motility. Furthermore, the presence of preoperative IEM should not be a contraindication for complete fundoplication. Key to optimal outcomes after LARS is careful patient selection based on objective perioperative data, including manometry evaluation, with the purpose of tailoring surgery to provide effective reflux control and improved esophageal clearance.

A systematic review of the true benefit of robotic surgery: Ergonomics

BACKGROUND

Ergonomics, as defined by the optimization of one's physical environment to enhance work performance, is an important consideration in surgery. While there have been reviews on the ergonomics of laparoscopy, this has not been the case for robotic surgery despite the rising number of publications.

METHODS

This study was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was performed on main databases to identify relevant articles.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine articles were included, comprising 3074 participants. Studies employing objective measurement tools showed that robotics conferred superior ergonomic benefits and reduced work load compared to laparoscopy, for both surgeons and trainees. Survey studies also demonstrated that self-reported discomfort was lower in robotic procedures compared to laparoscopy and open surgery. Compared to other subspecialities, gynecological procedures seem to be associated with greater surgeon-reported strain.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery is ergonomically superior to open and laparoscopic surgery. However, rates of physical strain remain significant and should be addressed by formal ergonomic training and adequate console familiarization.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and technical features using da Vinci Si and Xi robotic platforms for early stages of endometrial cancer

We directly compared perioperative outcomes and technical features between previous da Vinci Si and the newer Xi robotic platform during total hysterectomy plus salpingo-oophorectomy with or without lymphadenectomy for early-stage endometrial cancer. We retrospectively analyzed147 patients with histological confirmation of endometrial carcinoma stage IA: grade 1-2, 3 and stage IB: grade 1-2 who underwent surgery with da Vinci Si or Xi system between January 2016 and December 2018. Perioperative data, technical features and postoperative complications were considered. 91 patients underwent surgery with the Si system and 56 with the Xi system. Docking time using the Xi system was significantly shorter (p < 0.002), while overall operating time was similar. There were no significant differences in the number of harvested lymph nodes, conversion rate, mean hospital stay, complications, and technical aspects between the two groups. Our study detected similar perioperative outcomes and the trend toward shorter docking and operating time for Xi over Si robot.

Impact of robotic assistance on mental workload and cognitive performance of surgical trainees performing a complex minimally invasive suturing task

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the potential impact of robotic assistance on cognitive ergonomics during advanced minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of robotic assistance on mental workload and downstream cognitive performance in surgical trainees.

METHODS

Robot-naïve trainees from general surgery, urology and gynaecology, stratified by specialty and level of training, were randomised to either laparoscopic surgery (LS) or robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) and performed a time-limited, complex laparoscopic suturing task after watching a 5-min instructional video. The RALS group received an additional 5-min orientation to the robotic console. Subjective mental workload was measured using NASA Task Load Index. Concentration and executive cognitive function were assessed using Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), respectively. A p value of 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Sixteen senior residents (SR; ≥ PGY3) and 14 junior residents (JR; PGY1-2) completed the study. There was no difference in mental workload between LS and RALS. Within JR there was no difference in task completion time comparing LS versus RALS; however, LS was associated with impaired concentration post-task versus pre-task (PVT reaction time 306 versus 324 ms, p = 0.03), which was not observed for RALS. In contrast, amongst SR, RALS took significantly longer than LS (10.3 vs. 14.5 min, p = 0.02) and was associated with significantly worse performance on WCST (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance, in this setting, did not provide a technical performance advantage nor impact subjective mental workload with novice users regardless of level of surgery training. We observed a protective effect on cognitive performance offered by RALS to junior trainees with limited LS experience, yet a detrimental effect on senior trainees with greater LS ability and inadequate pre-study robotic training, suggesting that robotic consoles may be mentally taxing for robotic novices and consideration should be given to formal console training prior to initial clinical exposure.

Ergonomics in gynecologic surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are prevalent among surgeons and result in significant disability. We aimed to review the English-language literature regarding ergonomic risk, prevalence of WMSDs, and unique ergonomic considerations of gynecologic surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Surgeon WMSDs are prevalent, with rates ranging from 66 to 94% for open surgery, 73-100% for conventional laparoscopy, 54-87% for vaginal surgery, and 23-80% for robotic-assisted surgery. Risk factors for injury in open surgery include use of loupes, headlamps, and microscopes. Unique risks in laparoscopic surgery include table and monitor position, long-shafted instruments, and poor instrument handle design. In vaginal surgery, improper table height and twisted trunk position create injury risk. Although robotic surgery offers some advantages in neck and shoulder strain, it remains associated with trunk, wrist, and finger strain.

SUMMARY

WMSDs are prevalent among surgeons but have received little attention because of under-reporting of injury and logistical constraints of studying surgical ergonomics. Future research must aim to develop objective surgical ergonomics instruments and guidelines and to correlate ergonomics assessments with pain and tissue-level damage in surgeons with WMSDs. Ergonomics training should be developed and implemented in order to protect surgeons from preventable, potentially career-altering injuries.

Experience implication in subjective surgical ergonomics comparison between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgeries

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic surgery (LS) may lead to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and an increase in physical and mental workloads to the surgeon. Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) should improve the ergonomy of the surgeon. This study assesses the experience influence in surgical ergonomics between LS and RAS.

METHODS

LS and RAS lasting more than 60 min of effective operative time were compared. During the surgical procedure, the physical discomfort was evaluated using the Borg scale. At the end, the mental workload was evaluated using the NASA-TLX index. After global analysis, the experienced and young surgeons were assessed.

RESULTS

88 RAS and 82 LS were evaluated. During LS, the physical discomfort was significantly higher in all segments, and the pain increased significantly during the procedure in all segments compared to that evaluated in the RAS (p < 0.05). Forearms and the back were the most painful. The young surgeons did not display any improvement in the physical ergonomics of the RAS compared to the LS. Concerning the mental ergonomics, the overall workload and performance were significantly greater during the LS compared to the RAS (p < 0.05). For the young surgeons, the overall workload, the effort, the mental and the physical demands were greater during LS (p < 0.05). For the experienced surgeons, the physical demand was lower during the RAS compared to the LS (p < 0.05). However, the experienced surgeons expressed a feeling of greater performance after the LS (p < 0.01). RAS significantly reduces the onset of MSDs compared to LS, especially for the experienced surgeons.

CONCLUSION

RAS significantly reduces the onset of MSDs compared to LS, especially for the experienced surgeons.

Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Phase II Open Label Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The phase II randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted surgery with those of laparoscopic surgery in the patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of robot-assisted surgery over laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has not been established yet.

METHODS

Between February 21, 2012 and March 11, 2015, patients with rectal cancer (cT1-3NxM0) were enrolled. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either robot-assisted or laparoscopic surgery, and stratified per sex and administration of preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The primary outcome was the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) specimen. Secondary outcomes were the circumferential and distal resection margins, the number of harvested lymph nodes, morbidity, bowel function recovery, and quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 163 patients were randomly assigned to the robot-assisted (n = 81) and laparoscopic (n = 82) surgery groups, and 139 patients were eligible for the analyses (73 vs 66, respectively). One patient (1.2%) in the robot-assisted group was converted to open surgery. The TME quality did not differ between the robot-assisted and laparoscopic groups (80.3% vs 78.1% complete TME, respectively; 18.2% vs 21.9% nearly complete TME, respectively; P = 0.599). The resection margins, number of harvested lymph nodes, morbidity, and bowel function recovery also were not significantly different. On analyzing quality of life, scores of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC QLQ C30) and EORTC QLQ CR38 were similar in the 2 groups, but in the EORTC QLQ CR 38 questionnaire, sexual function 12 months postoperatively was better in the robot-assisted group than in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted surgery in rectal cancer showed TME quality comparable with that of laparoscopic surgery, and it demonstrated similar postoperative morbidity, bowel function recovery, and quality of life.

Role of robotic surgery on pelvic floor reconstruction

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) abdominal surgery has increasingly been used to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Besides the several advantages associated with minimal invasiveness, this approach bridged the gap between the benefits of vaginal surgery and the surgical success rates of open abdominal procedures. The most commonly performed procedure for suspension of the vaginal apex for postoperative vaginal prolapse by robotic-assisted laparoscopy is the sacrocolpopexy. Conventional laparoscopic application of this procedure was first reported in 1994 by Nezhat et al. and had not gained widespread adoption due to lengthy learning curve associated with laparoscopic suturing. Since FDA approval of the da Vinci® robot for gynecologic surgery in 2005, minimally invasive abdominal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse has become increasingly popular, as robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is an option for those surgeons without experience or training in the conventional route. Robotic surgery has made its way into the armamentarium of POP treatment and has allowed pelvic surgeons to adapt the "gold standard" technique of abdominal sacrocolpopexy to a minimally invasive approach with improved intraoperative morbidity and decreased convalescence. In fact, repair of pelvic organ prolapse can be performed robotically, and sometimes surgeons can feel suturing and dissection during the procedures less challenging with the assistance of the robot. However, even if robotic surgery may confer many benefits over conventional laparoscopy, these advantages should continue to be weighed against the cost of the technology. To date, as long-term outcomes, evidence about robotic sacrocolpopexy for a repair of pelvic organ prolapse are not conclusive, and much more investigations are needed to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes, perioperative and postoperative adverse events, and costs associated with these procedures. It is plausible to think that the main advantage is that robotics may lead to a widespread adoption of minimally invasive techniques in the field of pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The following review will address the development and current state of robotic assistance in treating pelvic floor reconstruction discussing available data about the techniques of robotic prolapse repair as well as morbidity, costs and clinical outcomes.

Ergonomics in Surgery: A Review

OBJECTIVE

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are prevalent among surgeons and may result in practice modification. We aimed to perform a comprehensive review of the English-language literature regarding ergonomic risk, prevalence of WMSDs, and unique ergonomic considerations by route of surgery.

METHODS

Multiple searches were performed of PubMed and University library resources to access English-language publications related to surgeon ergonomics. Combinations of keywords were used for each mode of surgery, including the following: "ergonomics," "guidelines," "injury," "operating room," "safety," "surgeon," and "work-related musculoskeletal disorders." Each citation was read in detail, and references were reviewed.

RESULTS

Surgeon WMSDs are prevalent, with rates ranging from 66% to 94% for open surgery, 73% to 100% for conventional laparoscopy, 54% to 87% for vaginal surgery, and 23% to 80% for robotic-assisted surgery. Risk factors for injury in open surgery include use of loupes, headlamps, and microscopes. Unique risks in laparoscopic surgery include table and monitor position, long-shafted instruments, and poor instrument handle design. In vaginal surgery, improper table height and twisted trunk position create injury risk. Although robotic surgery offers some advantages, it remains associated with trunk, wrist, and finger strain. Surgeon WMSDs often result in disability but are under-reported to institutions. Additionally, existing research tools face limitations in the operating room environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are prevalent among surgeons but have received little attention owing to under-reporting of injury and logistical constraints of studying surgical ergonomics. Future research must aim to develop objective surgical ergonomics instruments and guidelines and to correlate ergonomics assessments with pain and tissue-level damage in surgeons with WMSDs. Ergonomics training should be developed to protect surgeons from preventable, potentially career-altering injuries.

Skills in minimally invasive and open surgery show limited transferability to robotic surgery: results from a prospective study

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the transferability of conventional laparoscopic and open surgical skills to robotic-assisted surgery. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the transferability of expertise in conventional laparoscopy and open surgery to robotic-assisted surgery using the da Vinci Skills Simulator (dVSS). Secondary aims included evaluating the influence of individual participants' characteristics.

METHODS

Participants performed four tasks on the dVSS: Peg Board 1 (PB), Pick and Place (PP), Thread the Rings (TR), and Suture Sponge 1 (SS). Participants were classified into three groups (Novice, Intermediate, Experts) according to experience in laparoscopic and open surgery. All tasks were performed twice except for SS. Performance was assessed using the built-in scoring system.

RESULTS

37 medical students and 25 surgeons participated. Experts did not perform significantly better than less experienced participants on the dVSS. Specifically, with regard to laparoscopic experience, total simulator scores were: Novices 68.2 ± 28.8; Intermediates 65.1 ± 31.2; Experts 65.1 ± 30.0; p = 0.611. Regarding open surgical experience, scores were: Novices 68.6 ± 28.7; Intermediates 68.2 ± 30.8; Experts 63.2 ± 30.3; p = 0.305. Although there were some significant differences among groups for single parameters in specific tasks, there was no constant superiority of one group. Laparoscopic and open surgical Novices improved significantly in overall score and time for all three tasks (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic intermediates improved only in PP time (4.64 ± 3.42; p = 0.006), open Intermediates in PB score (11.98 ± 13.01; p = 0.025), and open Experts in PP score (6.69 ± 11.48; p = 0.048). Laparoscopic experts showed no improvement. Participants with gaming experience had better overall scores than non-gamers when comparing all second attempts (Gamer 83.62 ± 7.57; Non-Gamer 76.31 ± 12.78; p = 0.008) as well as first and second attempts together (Gamer 72.08 ± 8.86; Non-Gamer 65.45 ± 11.68; p = 0.039). Musical and sports experience showed no correlation with robotic performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted surgery requires skills distinct from conventional laparoscopy or open surgery. Basic robotic skills training prior to patient contact should be required.

Multicenter review of robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: is there a role for robotics?

BACKGROUND

The utilization of robotic platforms for general surgery procedures such as hernia repair is growing rapidly in the United States. A limited amount of data are available evaluating operative outcomes in comparison to standard laparoscopic surgery. We completed a retrospective review comparing robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair to provide safety and outcomes data to help design a future prospective trial design.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 215 patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (142 robotic and 73 laparoscopic) was completed at two large academic centers. Primary outcome measure evaluated was recurrence. Secondary outcomes included incidence of primary fascial closure, and surgical site occurrences.

RESULTS

Propensity for treatment match comparison demonstrated that robotic repair was associated with a decreased incidence of recurrence (2.1 versus 4.2%, p < 0.001) and surgical site occurrence (4.2 versus 18.8%, p < 0.001). This may be because robotic repair was associated with increased incidence of primary fascial closure (77.1 versus 66.7%, p < 0.01). Analysis of baseline patient populations showed that robotic repairs were completed on patients with lower body mass index (28.1 ± 3.6 versus 34.2 ± 6.4, p < 0.001) and fewer comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Our retrospective data show that robotic repair was associated with decreased recurrence and surgical site occurrence. However, the differences noted in the patient populations limit the interpretability of these results. As adoption of robotic ventral hernia repair increases, prospective trials need to be designed in order to investigate the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of this evolving technique.

Does a robotic surgery approach offer optimal ergonomics to gynecologic surgeons?: a comprehensive ergonomics survey study in gynecologic robotic surgery

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the ergonomics associated with robotic surgery including physical discomfort and symptoms, factors influencing symptom reporting, and robotic surgery systems components recommended to be improved.

METHODS

The anonymous survey included 20 questions regarding demographics, systems, ergonomics, and physical symptoms and was completed by experienced robotic surgeons online through American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and Society of Robotic Surgery (SRS).

RESULTS

There were 289 (260 gynecology, 22 gynecology-oncology, and 7 urogynecology) gynecologic surgeon respondents regularly practicing robotic surgery. Statistical data analysis was performed using the t-test, χ² test, and logistic regression. One hundred fifty-six surgeons (54.0%) reported experiencing physical symptoms or discomfort. Participants with higher robotic case volume reported significantly lower physical symptom report rates (p<0.05). Gynecologists who felt highly confident about managing ergonomic settings not only acknowledged that the adjustments were helpful for better ergonomics but also reported a lower physical symptom rate (p<0.05). In minimizing their symptoms, surgeons changed ergonomic settings (32.7%), took a break (33.3%) or simply ignored the problem (34%). Fingers and neck were the most common body parts with symptoms. Eye symptom complaints were significantly decreased with the Si robot (p<0.05). The most common robotic system components to be improved for better ergonomics were microphone/speaker, pedal design, and finger clutch.

CONCLUSION

More than half of participants reported physical symptoms which were found to be primarily associated with confidence in managing ergonomic settings and familiarity with the system depending on the volume of robotic cases. Optimal guidelines and education on managing ergonomic settings should be implemented to maximize the ergonomic benefits of robotic surgery.

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.

Combining of ETHOS Operating Ergonomic Platform, Three-dimensional Laparoscopic Camera, and Radius Surgical System Manipulators Improves Ergonomy in Urologic Laparoscopy: Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopy and da Vinci in a Pelvi Trainer

BACKGROUND

Posture, vision, and instrumentation limitations are the main predicaments of conventional laparoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To combine the ETHOS surgical chair, the three-dimensional laparoscope, and the Radius Surgical System manipulators, and compare the system with conventional laparoscopy and da Vinci in terms of task completion times and discomfort.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen trainees performed the three main laparoscopic suturing tasks of the Heilbronn training program (IV: simulation of dorsal venous complex suturing; V: circular suturing of tubular structure; and VI: urethrovesical anastomosis) in a pelvi trainer. The tasks were performed conventionally, utilizing the three devices, and robotically. Task completion times were recorded and the surgeon discomfort was evaluated using questionnaires.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Task completion times were compared using nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test and ergonomic scores were compared using Pearson chi-square test.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The use of the full laparoscopic set (ETHOS chair, three-dimensional laparoscopic camera, Radius Surgical System needle holders), resulted in a significant improvement of the completion time of the three tested tasks compared with conventional laparoscopy (p<0.001) and similar to da Vinci surgery. After completing Tasks IV, V, and VI conventionally, 12 (80%), 13 (86.7%), and 13 (86.7%) of the 15 trainees, respectively, reported heavy total discomfort. The full laparoscopic system nullified heavy discomfort for Tasks IV and V and minimized it (6.7%) for the most demanding Task VI. Especially for Task VI, all trainees gained benefit, by using the system, in terms of task completion times and discomfort. The limited trainee robotic experience and the questionnaire subjectivity could be a potential limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

The ergonomic laparoscopic system offers significantly improved task completion times and ergonomy than conventional laparoscopy. Furthermore, it demonstrates comparable results to robotic surgery.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The study was conducted in a pelvi trainer and no patients were recruited.

Surgeons' physical discomfort and symptoms during robotic surgery: a comprehensive ergonomic survey study

BACKGROUND

It is commonly believed that robotic surgery systems provide surgeons with an ergonomically sound work environment; however, the actual experience of surgeons practicing robotic surgery (RS) has not been thoroughly researched. In this ergonomics survey study, we investigated surgeons' physical symptom reports and their association with factors including demographics, specialties, and robotic systems.

METHODS

Four hundred and thirty-two surgeons regularly practicing RS completed this comprehensive survey comprising 20 questions in four categories: demographics, systems, ergonomics, and physical symptoms. Chi-square and multinomial logistic regression analyses were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-six surgeons (56.1 %) reported physical symptoms or discomfort. Among those symptoms, neck stiffness, finger, and eye fatigues were the most common. With the newest robot, eye symptom rate was considerably reduced, while neck and finger symptoms did not improve significantly. A high rate of lower back stiffness was correlated with higher annual robotic case volume, and eye symptoms were more common with longer years practicing robotic surgery (p < 0.05). The symptom report rate from urology surgeons was significantly higher than other specialties (p < 0.05). Noticeably, surgeons with higher confidence and helpfulness levels with their ergonomic settings reported lower symptom report rates. Symptoms were not correlated with age and gender.

CONCLUSION

Although RS provides relatively better ergonomics, this study demonstrates that 56.1 % of regularly practicing robotic surgeons still experience related physical symptoms or discomfort. In addition to system improvement, surgeon education in optimizing the ergonomic settings may be necessary to maximize the ergonomic benefits in RS.

Baseline Laparoscopic Skill May Predict Baseline Robotic Skill and Early Robotic Surgery Learning Curve

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery is associated with a learning curve unique to each trainee. Knowledge about a trainee's baseline skill and learning curve would facilitate the development of a more individualized training curriculum. The aim of our study was to determine whether baseline laparoscopic skill is predictive of one's baseline robotic skill and short-term learning curve.

METHODS

Trainees from four different surgical specialties were included in the study. Each trainee participated in a 4-week, simulation-based robotic surgery basic skills training course. Precourse, baseline laparoscopic and robotic skills were assessed using validated test tasks; a basic peg transfer (PT) and an advanced intracorporeal suturing and knot tying (ISKT) task. Trainee robotic skill was assessed again 1 week postcourse. Each task performance was video recorded and scored by two blinded expert surgeons.

RESULTS

A total of 32 trainees were included; 14 urology, 7 gynecology, 8 thoracic Sx, 3 general Sx. Most (91%) were senior residents or clinical fellows and 50% had no prior robotic experience. There were no differences in baseline laparoscopic and robotic skill related to reported prior robotic experience. Between specialties, no differences were seen on baseline laparoscopic skill and only small differences were seen on baseline robotic skill. Both baseline Lap PT (p = 0.01) and Lap ISKT (p = 0.01) performances correlated with baseline robotic ISKT performance, but not robotic PT scores. Only baseline Lap ISKT performance correlated with postcourse robotic PT (p = 0.01) and ISKT (p < 0.01) performance. Baseline robotic ISKT scores, but not PT scores, correlated with postcourse robotic performance (p = 0.02 for PT, p < 0.01 for ISKT).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a trainee's baseline laparoscopic skill correlated with certain baseline robotic skills. Better baseline performance on an advanced, but not basic, laparoscopic and robotic skill task may correlate with a shorter learning curve for basic robotic skills. Further exploration of this finding may yield better training curricula.

Manual Ambidexterity Predicts Robotic Surgical Proficiency

BACKGROUND

The manual dexterity of a surgeon is known to be related with surgical proficiency. Recently, as an objective measurement of surgical skills, inanimate methods using several types of simulators have been introduced. Using these simulators, we aimed to investigate the impact of manual dexterity on laparoscopic and robotic surgical proficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fellow surgeons, surgical residents, and medical students (n = 32) participated in this study. For the measurement of dexterity, the sums and differences of the right and left hand performance times for the Grooved Pegboard Test were used as an index of dexterity speed and ambidexterity, respectively. The performance times during three sessions of laparoscopic suturing using a D-box trainer and the performance scores during three sessions using two robotic suturing programs with different degrees of difficulty provided by the da Vinci® Skills Simulator™ (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) were analyzed according to the measured manual dexterity.

RESULTS

Manual dexterity was not a significant factor for performance time during laparoscopic suturing, which was more influenced by participants' surgical experiences. In robotic suturing, the performance score was impacted significantly by manual dexterity in terms of ambidexterity rather than dexterity speed. For an easy robotic suturing task, the gap of proficiency between the lower and higher ambidexterity groups was decreased successively with each of the three sessions. However, that gap in cases with a difficult task was maintained consistently throughout all three sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

The degree of ambidexterity was an initial predictor for proficiency with simulated robotic suture. However, this relation could be lessened through a few sessions of training, although for a more difficult task further repetitions would be needed.

Validity evidence for the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program as an assessment tool: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program uses five simulation stations (peg transfer, precision cutting, loop ligation, and suturing with extracorporeal and intracorporeal knot tying) to teach and assess laparoscopic surgery skills. We sought to summarize evidence regarding the validity of scores from the FLS assessment.

METHODS

We systematically searched for studies evaluating the FLS as an assessment tool (last search update February 26, 2013). We classified validity evidence using the currently standard validity framework (content, response process, internal structure, relations with other variables, and consequences).

RESULTS

From a pool of 11,628 studies, we identified 23 studies reporting validity evidence for FLS scores. Studies involved residents (n = 19), practicing physicians (n = 17), and medical students (n = 8), in specialties of general (n = 17), gynecologic (n = 4), urologic (n = 1), and veterinary (n = 1) surgery. Evidence was most common in the form of relations with other variables (n = 22, most often expert-novice differences). Only three studies reported internal structure evidence (inter-rater or inter-station reliability), two studies reported content evidence (i.e., derivation of assessment elements), and three studies reported consequences evidence (definition of pass/fail thresholds). Evidence nearly always supported the validity of FLS total scores. However, the loop ligation task lacks discriminatory ability.

CONCLUSION

Validity evidence confirms expected relations with other variables and acceptable inter-rater reliability, but other validity evidence is sparse. Given the high-stakes use of this assessment (required for board eligibility), we suggest that more validity evidence is required, especially to support its content (selection of tasks and scoring rubric) and the consequences (favorable and unfavorable impact) of assessment.

Learning tools and simulation in robotic surgery: state of the art

Robotic surgery has emerged as a new technology over the last decade and has brought with it new challenges, particularly in terms of teaching and training. To overcome these challenges, robotic courses, virtual simulation, and dual consoles have been successfully introduced. In fact, there are several simulators currently on the market that have proven to be a valid option for training, especially for the novice trainee. Robotic courses have also found success around the world, allowing participants to implement robotic programs at their institution, typically with the help of a proctor. More recently, the dual console has enabled two surgeons to be operating at the same time. Having one experienced surgeon and one trainee each at his or her own console has made it an obvious choice for training. Although these methods have been successfully introduced, the data remain relatively scarce concerning their role in training. The aim of this article was to review the various methods and tools involved in the training of surgeons in robotic surgery.

An assessment of the physical impact of complex surgical tasks on surgeon errors and discomfort: a comparison between robot-assisted, laparoscopic and open approaches

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate, in a simulated suturing task, individual surgeons’ performance using three surgical approaches: open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted. subjects and methods: Six urological surgeons made an in vitro simulated vesico-urethral anastomosis. All surgeons performed the simulated suturing task using all three surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted). The time taken to perform each task was recorded. Participants were evaluated for perceived discomfort using the self-reporting Borg scale. Errors made by surgeons were quantified by studying the video recording of the tasks. Anastomosis quality was quantified using scores for knot security, symmetry of suture, position of suture and apposition of anastomosis.

RESULTS

The time taken to complete the task by the laparoscopic approach was on average 221 s, compared with 55 s for the open approach and 116 s for the robot-assisted approach (anova, P < 0.005). The number of errors and the level of self-reported discomfort were highest for the laparoscopic approach (anova, P < 0.005). Limitations of the present study include the small sample size and variation in prior surgical experience of the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

In an in vitro model of anastomosis surgery, robot-assisted surgery combines the accuracy of open surgery while causing lesser surgeon discomfort than laparoscopy and maintaining minimal access.

A review of training research and virtual reality simulators for the da Vinci surgical system

PHENOMENON: Virtual reality simulators are the subject of several recent studies of skills training for robot-assisted surgery. Yet no consensus exists regarding what a core skill set comprises or how to measure skill performance. Defining a core skill set and relevant metrics would help surgical educators evaluate different simulators.

APPROACH

This review draws from published research to propose a core technical skill set for using the da Vinci surgeon console. Publications on three commercial simulators were used to evaluate the simulators' content addressing these skills and associated metrics.

FINDINGS

An analysis of published research suggests that a core technical skill set for operating the surgeon console includes bimanual wristed manipulation, camera control, master clutching to manage hand position, use of third instrument arm, activating energy sources, appropriate depth perception, and awareness of forces applied by instruments. Validity studies of three commercial virtual reality simulators for robot-assisted surgery suggest that all three have comparable content and metrics. However, none have comprehensive content and metrics for all core skills. INSIGHTS: Virtual reality simulation remains a promising tool to support skill training for robot-assisted surgery, yet existing commercial simulator content is inadequate for performing and assessing a comprehensive basic skill set. The results of this evaluation help identify opportunities and challenges that exist for future developments in virtual reality simulation for robot-assisted surgery. Specifically, the inclusion of educational experts in the development cycle alongside clinical and technological experts is recommended.

Training in minimally invasive lobectomy: thoracoscopic versus robotic approaches

BACKGROUND

Skills required for thoracoscopic and robotic operations likely differ. The needs and abilities of trainees learning these approaches require assessment.

METHODS

Trainees performed initial components of minimally invasive lobectomies using thoracoscopic or robotic approaches. Component difficulty was scored by trainees using the NASA task load index (NASATLX). Performance of each component was graded by trainees and attending surgeons on a 5-point ordinal scale (naïve, beginning learner, advanced learner, competent, master).

RESULTS

Eleven surgical trainees performed 87 replications among three lobectomy components (divide pulmonary ligament; dissect level 7/8/9 nodes; dissect level 4/5 nodes). Before performance NASATLX scores did not differ among components or between surgical approaches. Trainees' after performance NASATLX scores appropriately calibrated task load for the components. After performance NASATLX scores were significantly lower for thoracoscopy than before performance estimates; robotic scores were similar before surgery and after performance. Task load was higher for robotic than for thoracoscopic approaches. Trainees rated their performance higher than did attending surgeons in domains of knowledge and thinking, but ratings for other domains were similarly low. Ratings for performance improved significantly as component performance repetitions increased.

CONCLUSIONS

Trainees did not differentiate task load among components or surgical approaches before attempting them. Task load scores differentiated difficulty among initial components of lobectomy, and were greater for robotic than for thoracoscopic approaches. Trainees overestimated their level of cognitive performance compared with attending physician evaluation of trainee performance. The study provides insights into how to customize training for thoracoscopic and robotic lobectomy and identifies tools to assess training effectiveness.