Robotic surgery: current perceptions and the clinical evidence

Experiences of Patients Undergoing Robot-assisted Cardiac Surgery: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Over the last two decades, the use of robotic surgery in cardiac procedures has become increasingly prevalent. Typically, assessments of patient outcomes for robot-assisted surgery concentrate on patient morbidity and mortality, surgical complications, and length of hospital stay. However, there is limited research on patients' perceptions of robot-assisted surgery. Therefore, this study aims to determine the experiences of patients undergoing robot-assisted cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

The study used a qualitative design.

METHODS

The study was conducted with 12 patients who underwent robot-assisted heart surgery at an educational and research hospital. Ethical approval and written informed consent were obtained before the study.

FINDINGS

66.7% of the participants were male with an average age of 38.25 ± 16.06 years. The analysis of qualitative data identified three themes: Robotic surgery, Post-Surgical Experience, and Homecoming.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients expressed satisfaction with robotic surgery and recommended it to others undergoing surgery. Based on the findings, we may suggest that nurses may conduct personalized education programs about robotic surgery and develop programs to follow up with patients at home.

The general public's perception of robotic surgery - A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery is typically characterized by the telemanipulation of robotic arms controlled by a surgeon via a command system. Medical technology advancements have caused variations in how robotic surgery is conceptualised. It is important to ascertain the public's perception of robotic surgery, as this impacts decision making.

METHODS

A study protocol was developed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. All original research articles, abstracts, conference proceedings or grey literature were eligible. The Medline (Pubmed), Scopus, and Cochrane Databases, Google Scholar, white and green statement papers, and international guidelines were searched. A preliminary search identified key terms. Title and abstract screening was conducted. Full texts were appraised for eligibility. An inductive extraction process was utilized, grouping data into themes by content analysis, and developing a coding framework. Heterogeneity limited pooling of data and prevented aggregated data analysis. Therefore, NVivo software was used to augment this qualitative process and develop a meta-synthesis.

RESULTS

The search yielded 8818 articles across the bibliographic databases. After inclusion of the grey literature 132 full text manuscripts were assessed. 35 of which were included. Three main themes were identified from the coding framework: understanding of robotic surgery, acceptance of robotic surgery, and perceptions of robotic surgery. Micro-construct subthemes included 'understanding of robotic autonomy, surgeon role, and outcomes', 'determinants of understanding', 'sources of information', 'intention to use', and 'determinants of acceptance'. Robotic surgery is perceived as a risky modality by the general public. They have a limited understanding of this surgical approach and the extent of autonomy a robotic system has. Sex, age, and residence are important factors effecting the degree of understanding and intention to undergo robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery is perceived as a risky procedure by the general public. They have limited understanding of the modality, and low rates of acceptance to undergo it fearing greater complications.

Current and Future of Robotic Surgery in Thyroid Cancer Treatment

Thyroid cancer is among the most common endocrine malignancies, necessitating effective surgical interventions. Traditional open cervicotomy has long been the standard approach for thyroidectomy. However, the advent of robotic surgery has introduced new possibilities for minimally invasive procedures with benefits in terms of cosmetic outcomes, enhanced precision, comparable complication rates, and reduced recovery time. This study mainly reviewed the most widely used and well-known robotic thyroidectomy approaches: the transaxillary approach, the bilateral axillo-breast approach, and the transoral approach. This review examines the current status and future potential of robotic surgery in thyroid cancer treatment, comparing its efficacy, safety, and outcomes with those of conventional open cervicotomy. Challenges such as a longer operative time and higher costs exist. Future directions include technological advancements, tele-surgery, single-port surgery, and the integration of artificial intelligence. Robotic surgery holds promise in optimizing patient outcomes in thyroid cancer treatment.

[Robotic rectal surgery]

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent cancerous diseases in industrial nations, whereby tumors of the rectum constitute approximately 30-40% of all colorectal cancers. In addition to the implementation and establishment of novel neoadjuvant concepts for the treatment of rectal cancer, there has been a continuous evolution of surgical techniques in recent years towards minimally invasive surgery. In this respect robot-assisted surgery has become more and more popular despite seemingly weak evidence regarding clinical benefits and the not to be ignored economic aspects; however, recently published high-quality studies provide new evidence showing advantages for a robotic resection in patients suffering from rectal cancer. Thus, the progressive implementation of robotic surgical systems is increasingly attaining a scientific foundation.

Knowledge, attitude, and perception of robotic-assisted surgery among the general population in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has revolutionized surgical practices, with robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) significantly advancing. However, the understanding and acceptance of RAS vary, impacting its widespread adoption. This study aims to assess Saudi Arabians' attitudes and comprehension of RAS, which is crucial for promoting its integration into surgical procedures. A cross-sectional study was conducted in various Saudi Arabian cities. A total of 1449 participants were included, while participants with cognitive issues were excluded. Demographic information, knowledge, technology experience, attitudes, and perceptions about RAS were collected using an online self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Of the participants, 51.1% demonstrated awareness of RAS, mainly through social media (36.9%). Factors influencing awareness included gender, education, income, occupation, computer literacy, and technology comfort. Gender disparities were evident in attitudes and perceptions toward RAS. Concerns about RAS included robot malfunction (62.0%), surgical errors (45.4%), and surgeon competency (44.7%). 36.4% of the participants believe RAS is faster, 29.9% believe RAS is less painful, and 25.3% believe RAS has fewer complications. Positive perceptions encompassed the belief that robot-using surgeons are more skilled (44.5%) and hospitals offering RAS are better (54.3%). Notably, 47.7% expressed willingness to consider RAS as a treatment option. The study underscores the significance of promoting awareness and informed decisions to ensure the successful integration of RAS in surgical practices. Addressing concerns and misconceptions and enhancing public comprehension are pivotal for facilitating informed decision-making and fostering RAS acceptance within Saudi Arabia's surgical landscape.

Perceptions of theatre team members to robotic assisted surgery and the aid of technology in colorectal surgery

The implementation of robotic assisted surgery (RAS) has brought in a change to the perception and roles of theatre staff, as well as the dynamics of the operative environment and team. This study aims to identify and describe current perceptions of theatre staff in the context of RAS. 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted in a tertiary level university hospital, where RAS is utilised in selected elective settings. Interviews were conducted by an experienced research nurse to staff of the colorectal department operating theatre (nursing, surgical and anaesthetics) with some experience in operating within open, laparoscopic and RAS surgical settings. Thematic analysis on all interviews was performed, with formation of preliminary themes. Respondents all discussed advantages of all modes of operating. All respondents appreciated the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, in the reduced physiological insult to patients. However, interviewees remarked on the current perceived limitations of RAS in terms of logistics. Some voiced apprehension and anxieties about the safety if an operation needs to be converted to open. An overarching theme with participants of all levels and backgrounds was the 'Teamwork' and the concept of the [robotic] team. The physical differences of RAS changes the traditional methods of communication, with the loss of face-to-face contact and the physical 'separation' of the surgeon from the rest of the operating team impacting theatre dynamics. It is vital to understand the staff cultures, concerns and perception to the use of this relatively new technology in colorectal surgery.

Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer in patients with varied body mass indexes: evaluating of short-term outcomes

The main aim of this study was to evaluate and contrast the efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic surgical procedures in the treatment of low and mid rectal cancer in different BMI (body mass index) groups. The clinical records of patients who had laparoscopic or robotic proctectomy at a single center between December 2019 and August 2023 were analyzed. Then we utilized a classification framework to categorize individuals based on their BMI into three unique groups: non-obese, overweight, and obese. The short-term efficacy was evaluated. A consecutive sample of 1413 patients was included in this retrospective investigation. 1158 people out of the total sample chose laparoscopic surgery, whereas 255 people chose robotic surgery. In the group of obese people, robotic surgery showed a statistically significant decrease in blood loss compared to laparoscopic surgery (P = 0.026). People who were overweight or obese were in the hospital for a shorter amount of time after robotic surgery than after laparoscopic surgery (P = 0.033 and P = 0.031, respectively). People with different BMIs in the robotic surgery group took less time to have a flatus passage and oral intake those in the laparoscopic surgery group. Oncological outcomes and the frequency of complications were comparable between the two treatments with different BMIs. Surgical resection of patients undergoing low-anterior surgery may benefit from a robotic approach, particularly in overweight and obese patients.

Impact of visceral fat area on short-term outcomes in robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer

Rectal cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers that arise in the digestive tract. The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the impact of visceral fat area (VFA) on postoperative outcomes in mid and low rectal cancer patients undergoing robotic surgery (RS). Data were collected on patients who underwent robotic anterior rectal resection in a single center from December 2019 to October 2023. Clinical pathology information was analyzed. Statistical analysis was done on the computed tomography (CT) imaging data. A total of 277 patients were included in the study, including 121 cases with visceral obesity (VO) and 156 cases without VO. There was no statistically significant disparity in the lymph node dissection count, blood loss, duration of hospitalization, time to first liquid diet, early postoperative complications, histopathologic specimen indices (quality of TME and CRM involvement rate), and or the rate of conversion to open surgery between VO and non-VO group (P > 0.05). Nevertheless, the group of individuals with VO experienced a lengthier duration of surgery (P < 0.001) and a delayed time until the first passage of flatus (P < 0.001) in comparison to the group without VO. The study suggests that VO does not significantly impact early complications or the quality of surgical outcomes in mid and low rectal cancer patients undergoing robotic surgery. The findings support the continued use of RS as an optimal strategy for technically demanding patients.

Impaired robotic surgical visualization: archaic issues in a modern operating room

While robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been revolutionizing surgical procedures, it has various areas needing improvement, specifically in the visualization sector. Suboptimal vision due to lens occlusions has been a topic of concern in laparoscopic surgery but has not received much attention in robotic surgery. This study is one of the first to explore and quantify the degree of disruption encountered due to poor robotic visualization at a major academic center. In case observations across 28 RAS procedures in various specialties, any lens occlusions or "debris" events that appeared on the monitor displays and clinicians' reactions, the cause, and the location across the monitor for these events were recorded. Data were then assessed for any trends using analysis as described below. From around 44.33 h of RAS observation time, 163 debris events were recorded. 52.53% of case observation time was spent under a compromised visual field. In a subset of 15 cases, about 2.24% of the average observation time was spent cleaning the lens. Additionally, cautery was found to be the primary cause of lens occlusions and little variation was found within the spread of the debris across the monitor display. This study illustrates that in 6 (21.43%) of the cases, 90% of the observation time was spent under compromised visualization while only 2 (7.14%) of the cases had no debris or cleaning events. Additionally, we observed that cleaning the lens can be troublesome during the procedure, interrupting the operating room flow.

[Robot-assisted visceral surgery in Germany : Analysis of the current status and trends of the last 5 years using data from the StuDoQ|Robotics registry]

Robot-assisted systems have been increasingly used in general surgery for several years. Accordingly, the number of systems installed in Germany has also rapidly increased. While around 100 robot-assisted systems were used in German hospitals in 2018, this figure had already risen to more than 200 by 2022. The aim of this article is to present the current state of development and trends in robotic surgery in Germany. For this purpose, data from the StuDoQ|Robotics register were analyzed. Furthermore, a descriptive analysis of concomitant diagnosis-related groups (DRG) data was carried out via the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), for a better assessment of the representativeness of the StuDoQ|Robotics register data. In both data sets, the annual number of robot-assisted visceral surgery procedures in Germany steadily increased. Compared to the DRG data, only 3.7% up to a maximum of 36.7% of all robot-assisted procedures performed were documented in the StuDoQ|Robotics register, depending on the type of procedure. Colorectal resections were the most frequent robot-assisted procedures (StuDoQ: 32.5% and 36.7% vs. DRG data: 24.2% and 29.7%) and had, for example, low mortality rates (StuDoQ: 1% and 1% vs. DRG data: 2.3% and 1.3%). Due to the low coverage rates of robot-assisted esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and liver interventions, no valid statements could be derived from the StuDoQ data for these areas. With the current coverage rates, the informative value of the StuDoQ|Robotics register is considerably limited for some types of intervention. In the future, measures should therefore be explored that lead to a significant increase in the coverage rates.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision: a retrospective multicenter study with propensity score matching

OBJECTIVE

During the past decade, the concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been developed in an attempt to minimize recurrence for right-sided colon cancer. This study aims to compare outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME for right-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter propensity score matching study. From July 2016 to July 2021, 382 consecutive patients from different Chinese surgical departments were available for inclusion out of an initial cohort of 412, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME. Data of all patients were retrospectively collected and reviewed. Of these, 149 cases were performed by a robotic approach, while the other 233 cases were done by laparoscopy. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare perioperative, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups (n = 142).

RESULTS

Before propensity score matching, there were no statistical differences regarding the sex, history of abdominal surgery, body mass index (BMI), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system, tumor location, and center between groups (p > 0.05), while a significant difference was observed regarding age (p = 0.029). After matching, two comparable groups of 142 cases were obtained with equivalent patient characteristics (p > 0.05). Blood loss, time to oral intake, return of bowel function, length of stay, and complications were not different between groups (p > 0.05). The robotic group showed a significantly lower conversion rate (0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.03), but a longer operative time (200.9 min vs. 182.3 min, p < 0.001) and a higher total hospital cost (85,016 RMB vs. 58,266 RMB, p < 0.001) compared with the laparoscopic group. The number of harvested lymph nodes was comparable (20.4 vs. 20.5, p = 0.861). Incidence of complications, mortality, and pathologic outcomes were similar between groups (p > 0.05). The 2-year disease-free survival rates were 84.9% and 87.1% (p = 0.679), and the overall survival rates between groups were 83.8% and 80.7% (p = 0.943).

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis, the outcomes of robotic right hemicolectomy with CME were comparable to the laparoscopic procedures with fewer conversions to open surgery. More clinical advantages of the robotic surgery system need to be further confirmed by well-conducted randomized clinical trials with large cohorts of patients.

Patient experiences of left-sided colorectal resection by robotic, conventional laparoscopic and open approaches: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery (RS) is increasingly employed in colorectal surgical practice, widening the range of surgical techniques offered to patients. We investigated the perceptions of patients with colorectal cancer in relation to RS, open surgery (OS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), to identify ideas or assumptions which, in the context of shared surgeon-patient decision-making, may affect the resultant choice of surgical technique. We also investigated salient factors affecting patients' perioperative experience, including those of RS patients, to guide improvements in care and preoperative patient preparation.

METHODS

This study was conducted on patients who underwent resection of left-sided colorectal cancer at a large UK teaching hospital from November 2020 to July 2021. Purposive sampling was used to ensure a roughly equal proportion of patients who underwent RS, CLS and OS. The patients included in the study participated in semi-structured interviews six weeks postoperatively. The interview schedule allowed discussion around patients' experience of their surgery and postoperative recovery, and their perceptions of surgical techniques. Interview transcripts were coded manually using inductive thematic analysis, and analyst triangulation was employed to refine coding schemes and ensure reliability of emerging themes.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were recruited to the study; RS n = 9 (median age 69 [range 60-80] years); CLS n = 10 (median age 72 [range 32-82] years; OS n = 8 (median age 71 [range 60-75] years). Patients understood the technological benefits of RS but were concerned by a risk of technological failure causing patient harm. OS was understood to be associated with more pain and longer recovery than RS or CLS. Patients perceived CLS to be more technically challenging compared with OS. Less pain and smaller wounds than expected were significant positive factors in the experience of RS and CLS patients specifically. Complications and emotional impact were significant factors in the experience of all groups, for which many patients felt underprepared.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients generally have a positive view of RS and technical innovation in surgery. Concerns mostly centred around failure of technology. Many patients felt unprepared for significant factors in their perioperative experience. Surgeons and healthcare providers should be prepared to address patients' perceptions and expectations of colorectal surgery preoperatively.

Surgeon perception of factors affecting the efficiency of conventional and robotic laparoscopy: A Pan India study

Background

Laparoscopic surgery, being minimally invasive, offers many benefits including faster patient recovery, reduced scarring and lower mortality rate. It is, however, technically challenging and requires a long learning curve. These issues can be overcome by Robot-Assisted Surgery (RAS) systems, which incorporate computer-controlled motions enabling enhanced precision and accuracy.

Methods

This study involves identifying and verifying various difficulties related to laparoscopy and the role of RAS in their mitigation. It involved 93 surgeons across India, covering a range of demographics, medical specialties and experience. They were interviewed to understand the current status and to compare RAS with conventional laparoscopy. The questionnaire developed for the purpose tests a set of hypotheses related to instruments, comfort, and other factors derived from the available literature as well as inputs from leading laparoscopy surgeons and domain experts.

Results

A grading system was adopted to evaluate the hypotheses based on the surgeons' responses. A statistical method based on T-test was employed to gain useful inferences from the study. The results showed that early-career surgeons preferred haptic enabled systems. As the experience of the surgeon increases, tissue identification becomes easier, thereby reducing the need for haptic feedback-enabled instruments.

Conclusions

The surgeons from across the demographics were strongly in the favour of the need for articulated instruments with surgeon-controlled camera systems. They reported a reduction in physical and mental discomfort during surgical procedures using RAS. They also confirmed the similarity in patient outcomes for both conventional laparoscopy and RAS. These insights are expected to be interesting and useful for further research and development in this field.

Robotic Cholecystectomies: What Are They Good for? - A Retrospective Study - Robotic versus Conventional Cases

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted cholecystectomies are often criticized as expensive with uncertain benefit to patients. Characterization of robotic surgery benefits, as well as specific factors that drive cost, has the potential to shape the current debate.

METHODS

The surgical cost and outcomes among patients who underwent robotic (n = 283) or non-robotic (n = 1438) laparoscopic cholecystectomies between 2012 and 2018 at a single academic institution were examined retrospectively. All cholecystectomies were primary surgical procedures with no secondary procedures. We also examined the subset of robotic (n = 277) and non-robotic (n = 1108) outpatient procedures.

RESULTS

Robotic cholecystectomies were associated with higher median total cost compared to conventional procedures, largely attributable to variable costs and surgical costs. Patients who underwent conventional cholecystectomy had longer mean lengths of stays (1.7 versus 1.1 days) compared to robotic procedures-with over 10 times as many requiring hospital admission.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, robotic cholecystectomies have a little value to patients and institutions outside of surgical training. Prior to narrowing the analysis to outpatient cases, difference in total cost between procedures was less pronounced due to more frequent inpatient management following conventional procedures. Future optimization of robotic consumables and free market competition among system manufacturers may increase financial feasibility by decreasing variable costs associated with robotic surgery.

The use of advanced robotic simulation labs to advance and assess senior resident robotic skills and operating room leadership competency: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

General surgery has the fastest growing robotic operative volume in the United States, but most robotic curricula are focused on basic psychomotor skills. There are limited curricula focused on advanced robotic technical and related non-technical skills. We describe a novel pilot curriculum for robotic hiatal hernia repair developed for senior surgical residents to provide training and standardized assessment of higher-order robotic technical and leadership skills.

METHODS

Twelve senior residents, post-graduate year (PGY) 4 & 5, participated in a robotic hiatal hernia repair skills curriculum. Residents completed a pre- and post-survey on confidence and ability ratings on a 5-point Likert-type Scale, and a knowledge assessment. An informal faculty-led didactic was provided prior to the simulation. Residents were scored on two validated assessment tools: Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE) and Global Ratings Scale of Operative Performance (GRS) by faculty proctors.

RESULTS

Confidence in ability to independently complete a robotic hiatal hernia case increased from mean of 2.6 ± 0.8 to 3.3 ± 0.6 (p = 0.0007). Following the simulation, residents reported increased overall confidence and ability to operate independently with mean scores of 3.3 ± 0.8 and 3.8 ± 0.9, respectively. Mean O-SCORE and GRS scores were 3.6 (range 2 - 4) and 25.4 (range 12 - 31), respectively. Number of prior live robotic cases was strongly positively correlated to O-SCORE (R = 0.84, p = 0.0006) and GRS (R = 0.88, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study suggests live-operative robotic training is not sufficient alone for advanced robotic skill training. Simulations such as this can be used to (1) practice advanced robotic technical and relevant non-technical skills such as communication and operating room leadership in a low stake setting and (2) assess residents in a standardized environment to eventually evaluate robotic competency.

Robotic Anxiety—Parents’ Perception of Robot-Assisted Pediatric Surgery

In contrast to many other countries, robot-assisted (RA) pediatric surgery is not yet very common in Germany. Although the first pediatric RA intervention was published in 2001, RA pediatric surgery is still perceived as a “new technology”. As a consequence, little is known about parents’ perception of this operation method. In this study, we analyzed parents‘ intention to let their child undergo RA and laparoscopic (LA) surgery. Two subsamples (online and at the University Medical Center Goettingen) received a questionnaire addressing attitude towards RA and LA pediatric surgery with the help of a case example. Results showed that parents had a higher intention to consent to LA surgery. Perceiving more benefits, assuming a positive attitude of the social environment, and feeling less anxiety increased intention. A mediation analysis indicated that the type of surgery affected intentions through assumed attitude of the social environment. Exploratory analyses showed that the perception of risks and anxiety reduced intention for only RA surgery. These findings should be considered in preoperational discussions with parents. Anxiety and perceived risks should especially be addressed in order to encounter hesitancy.

Assessing the role of robotic proctectomy in obese patients: a contemporary NSQIP analysis

Robotic proctectomy has become increasingly popular for both benign and malignant indications. The purpose of this study was to determine if the robotic approach has a distinct advantage over laparoscopy in obese patients, which has been suggested by previous subgroup analyses. We performed a retrospective review of 2016–2018 National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data to compare outcomes between patients who underwent robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy, stratified by Body Mass Index (BMI) subgroups. We also compared outcomes of converted minimally invasive proctectomy to planned open operations. Four thousand four hundred eighteen (69.3%) patients underwent laparoscopic proctectomy, and 1956 (30.7%) patients underwent robotic proctectomy. Robotic proctectomy was associated with a significantly lower conversion rate compared to laparoscopic proctectomy (5.1% vs 12.3%; p = 0.002), and this relationship was maintained on an adjusted model. Obese (BMI > 30) patients were more likely to require conversion in both laparoscopic and robotic groups with the greatest difference in the conversion rate in the obese subgroup. Patients who underwent conversion had higher composite morbidity compared to patients who underwent planned open operations (50.8% vs 41.3%; p < 0.001). And among patients with rectal cancer, robotic proctectomy was associated with a greater incidence of positive radial tumor margins compared to laparoscopic proctectomy (8.0% vs 6.4%; p = 0.039), driven primarily by the obese subgroup. Our study demonstrates that robotic proctectomy is associated with a 7% lower conversion rate compared to laparoscopy and that obese patients are more likely to require conversion than non-obese patients. Among obese patients with rectal cancer, we identified an increased risk of positive radial margins with robotic compared to laparoscopic proctectomy.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and propensity score matched studies

PURPOSE

There has not been a consensus on the superiority of a surgical approach for minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to compare clinical, and patient-reported outcomes of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (rVHR) to traditional endo-laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (lapVHR).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Scopus from inception to 16th March 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials and propensity score matched studies comparing rVHR to lapVHR. A meta-analysis was done for the outcomes of operative time, length of hospital stay, open conversion, recurrence, surgical site occurrence and cost.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies (3732 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Significantly shorter operative times were reported with the lapVHR as compared to rVHR (weighted mean difference (WMD): 62.52, 95% CI: 50.84-74.19). There was also significantly less rates of open conversion with rVHR as compared to lapVHR (WMD: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.09-0.54). No significant differences in patient-reported outcomes that was discernible from the two papers that reported them.

CONCLUSION

Overall, rVHR is comparable to lapVHR with longer operative times but less open conversion. It is, therefore, important to have proper patient selection to maximise the utility of rVHR.

ROBOT-ASSISTED VITREORETINAL SURGERY IMPROVES SURGICAL ACCURACY COMPARED WITH MANUAL SURGERY: A Randomized Trial in a Simulated Setting

Robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery increases precision and limits tissue damage compared with manual surgery especially for the novice surgeon. The Eyesi Simulator is a feasible platform for investigating robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery.

Purpose:

To compare manual and robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery using a virtual-reality surgical simulator.

Methods:

Randomized controlled crossover study. Ten experienced vitreoretinal surgeons and 10 novice ophthalmic surgeons were included. The participants were randomized to start with either manual or robot-assisted surgery. Participants completed a test session consisting of three vitreoretinal modules on the Eyesi virtual-reality simulator. The automated metrics of performance supplied by the Eyesi simulator were used as outcome measures. Primary outcome measures were time with instruments inserted (seconds), instrument movement (mm), and tissue treatment (mm²).

Results:

Robot-assisted surgery was slower than manual surgery for both novices and vitreoretinal surgeons, 0.24 SD units (P = 0.024) and 0.73 SD units (P < 0.001), respectively. Robot-assisted surgery allowed for greater precision in novices and vitreoretinal surgeons, −0.96 SD units (P < 0.001) and −0.47 SD units (P < 0.001), respectively. Finally, novices using robot-assisted surgery inflicted less tissue damage when compared with that using manual surgery, −0.59 SD units (P = 0.009).

Conclusion:

At the cost of time, robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery seems to improve precision and limit tissue damage compared with that of manual surgery. In particular, the performance of novice surgeons is enhanced with robot-assisted vitreoretinal surgery.

Understanding the Current Role of Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

The role of robotic surgery in bariatrics remains controversial. Patient selection for robotic surgery is not well-studied. The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with robotic surgery and its temporal trends.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database from 2015 to 2018 was used. Adult patients undergoing primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) using the laparoscopic or robotic approach were identified. Revisional, hybrid, or those with concomitant procedures were excluded. Logistic regression was conducted to identify factors associated with undergoing robotic-assisted surgery.

RESULTS

Among 211,568 patients who underwent SG, 9.1% underwent a robotic SG; among 76,805 patients who underwent RYGB, 7.9% of patients underwent a robotic RYGB. During 2015-2018, robotics increased from 7.1 to 11.3% for SG and 7.4 to 8.6% for RYGB. After controlling for patient characteristics, there was still an increasing trend in the use of robotic surgery: SG (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio, aOR, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.17-1.20) and RYGB (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.08). For both robotic SG and RYGB, functional status and African American race were associated with undergoing robotic surgery, while races other than White or African American and Hispanic ethnicity were not. Pre-operative IVC filter was associated with robotic SG, while the presence of GERD, diabetes, and COPD were associated with robotic RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic bariatric surgery has increased over time. Our findings identified factors associated with the receipt of robotic surgery. Reasons for these factors require further investigation to better delineate indications for this technology.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Overall and Top 100 Most-Cited Studies About Robotic Surgery Versus Open Surgery

BACKGROUND

In the last 30 years, significant progress in the field of surgery has been achieved with the advent of robotic surgery. In this study, we aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis to identify the distribution and characteristics overall and of the top 100 most-cited studies about robotic surgery versus open surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on March 26, 2021 using Web of Science Core Collection. Two reviewers independently screened documents, and the top 100 most-cited studies were identified. Excel 2019 and VOSviewer were used to collect the data, and visual information was obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 2306 documents were searched from the Web of Science Core Collection, and 1065 journals and 2913 institutes were extracted. A significant growth was observed in the last 15 years. The number of citations from the United States accounted for 33.31% of the total number of citations. There were nine American institutes and one Swedish institute in the top 10 institutes. Four journals in the field of urology or gynecology were present in the top 10 published journals. Few global communications between authors, institutes, and countries authors were observed.

CONCLUSION

The lack of close cooperation among scientific research institutions may have affected the industrialization process of surgical robots. Some developing countries, including South America and Africa, should seize the development opportunity of robotic surgery to improve the level of domestic research on robotic surgery.

[DeRAS I-German situation of robotic-assisted surgery-an online survey]

Hintergrund

Die robotische Assistenz hat sich in der Chirurgie etabliert, ist aber noch kein Standard. Der aktuelle Stand der klinischen Verbreitung in Deutschland ist weiter unklar. Industrieunabhängige Quellen sind rar.

Ziel der Arbeit

Ziel dieser Umfrage ist es, den aktuellen Stand der robotisch assistierten Chirurgie (RAS) fachübergreifend in Deutschland im Zeitraum von 2014 bis 2018 zu untersuchen.

Materialien und Methoden

Mit einer Internetrecherche wurden Krankenhäuser (KH) und Fachabteilungen (FA) mit Zugang zur RAS identifiziert. Die FA wurden aufgefordert, ihre Daten aus den Jahren 2014 bis 2018 zu teilen. Neben klinischen Daten wurden Daten zu Nutzung, Implementierung, Training und Finanzierung abgefragt.

Ergebnisse

Am 31.12.2018 wurde die RAS an 121 KH in Deutschland angeboten. 383 FA mit Zugang zur RAS wurden identifiziert. 26 % (n = 98) der FA haben geantwortet. Im Mittel verfügte jede FA über zwei Konsolenchirurgen. 10 % der KH verfügten über mehr als 1 RAS-System. 100 % der erfassten RAS-Systeme stammten von der Firma Intuitive Surgical Inc., CA, USA. Die RAS wurde zu 65 % in der Urologie implementiert, zu 12 % in der Viszeralchirurgie (VC). 21 % der Programme erfolgten interdisziplinär und 4 % multidisziplinär (> 3). 83 % der Systeme wurden gekauft, 17 % anderweitig finanziert. Bei den Operationsmehrkosten gaben 74 % der Kliniken an, diese selbst zu tragen. 14 % wählten eine Umlage. Seit 2014 steigerten sich die Eingriffe um den Faktor 4 auf ca. 8000. Der Anteil der VC steigerte sich um das Fünffache seit 2016.

Schlussfolgerung

Die RAS erlebte in Deutschland bis 2018 ein starkes Wachstum. Das Eingriffsspektrum entspricht dem der Laparoskopie. Bei aktuell fehlender Kostenerstattung für den technischen Mehraufwand, wird die RAS überwiegend im mittel- und hochkomplexen Bereich eingesetzt. Der Online-Survey ist eine gute Methode, ohne hohen administrativen Aufwand unabhängige Daten zu erheben.

COVID-19 and beyond: development of a comprehensive telemedical diagnostic framework

Purpose

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a threatening bottleneck of medical staff arose due to a shortage of trained caregivers, who became infected while working with infectious patients. While telemedicine is rapidly evolving in the fields of teleconsultation and telesurgery, proper telediagnostic systems are not yet available, although the demand for contactless patient–doctor interaction is increasing.

Methods

In this project, the current limitations were addressed by developing a comprehensive telediagnostic system. Therefore, medical examinations have been assessed in collaboration with medical experts. Subsequently, a framework was developed, satisfying the relevant constraints of medical-, technical-, and hygienic- aspects in order to transform in-person examinations into a contactless procedure. Diagnostic steps were classified into three groups: assisted procedures carried out by the patient, teleoperated examination methods, and adoptions of conventional methods.

Results

The Telemedical Diagnostic Framework was implemented, resulting in a functional proof of concept, where potentially infectious patients could undergo a full medical examination. The system comprises, e.g., a naso-pharyngeal swab, an inspection of the oral cavity, auscultation, percussion, and palpation, based on robotic end-effectors. The physician is thereby connected using a newly developed user-interface and a lead robot, with force feedback control, that enables precise movements with the follower robot on the patient’s side.

Conclusion

Our concept proves the feasibility of a fully telediagnostic system, that consolidates available technology and new developments to an efficient solution enabling safe patient-doctor interaction. Besides infectious situations, this solution can also be applied to remote areas.

Online Crowdsourcing to Explore Public Perceptions of Robotic-Assisted Orthopedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits of robotic-assisted technology in total joint arthroplasty are unclear, but its use is increasing. This study employed online crowdsourcing to explore public perceptions and beliefs regarding robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery.

METHODS

A 30-question survey was completed by 588 members of the public using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants answered questions regarding robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery, sociodemographic factors, and validated assessments of health literacy and patient engagement. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to determine population characteristics associated with preference for robotic technology.

RESULTS

Most respondents believe robotic-assisted surgery leads to better results (69%), fewer complications (69%), less pain (59%), and faster recovery (62%) than conventional manual methods. About half (49%) would prefer a low-volume surgeon using robotic technology to a high-volume surgeon using conventional manual methods. The 3 main concerns regarding robotic technology included lack of surgeon experience with robotic surgery, robot malfunction causing harm, and increased cost. Only half of respondents accurately understand the actual role of the robot in the operating room. Overall, 34% of participants have a clear preference for robotic-assisted surgery over a conventional manual approach. After multivariable regression analysis, Asian race, working in healthcare, early technology adoption, and prior knowledge of robotic surgery were independent predictors of preferring robotic-assisted surgery.

CONCLUSION

The public's unawareness of the dubious outcome superiority associated with robotic-assisted orthopedic surgery may contribute to misinformed decisions in some patients. Robotic-assisted technology appears to be a powerful marketing tool for surgeons and hospitals.

Senhance surgical system in benign hysterectomy: A real-world comparative assessment of case times and instrument costs versus da Vinci robotics and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy procedures

OBJECTIVES

Comparison of retrospective, learning curve benign hysterectomy cost and case time data from Senhance total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) cases with similar da Vinci robot cases and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) cases.

METHODS

Instrument costs, console time, and case time analysis from six surgeons at four U.S. and European hospitals compared with retrospective, sequential da Vinci TLH and standard laparoscopic LAVH cases extracted from the CAVAlytics database.

RESULTS

Senhance Gyn surgeons in their learning curve when compared to da Vinci learning curve Gyn surgeons achieved lower median instrument costs ($559 vs. $1393, respectively, p < 0.001) with comparable console times (91.5 vs. 96 min, p = 0.898); Senhance and LAVH case costs were comparable ($559 vs. $498, p = 0.336).

CONCLUSION

In benign hysterectomy, the Senhance system may present a lower-cost approach with equivalent case times compared with similar da Vinci robotic cases.

Trans-oral robotic surgery: a safe and effective tool in head and neck surgery in an Australian rural setting

BACKGROUND

Trans-oral robotic surgery (TORS) facilitates surgical resection of tumours as an alternative to open surgery and has demonstrated favourable oncological results. Given the novelty of TORS and the paucity of evidence on TORS-specific complications in a rural setting, we report our experience with TORS at an Australian rural head and neck centre.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all robotic cases performed at a regional head and neck centre in Queensland was undertaken from 2014 to 2019. Patient demographics, pre-operative surgical risk, complications and outcomes such as margins and cancer recurrence were recorded. Complications were graded based on the Clavien-Dindo grading system. Descriptive statistics were used to present patient characteristics and statistical analyses were performed using Stata.

RESULTS

Forty-two TORS surgeries were performed. Twenty-one had histology confirming malignancy. There were no adverse intraoperative effects. Overall, seven patients (16.7%) had at least one complication. Four were recorded as a Clavien-Dindo 3b (post-operative bleed, wound infection and drain dislodgment). Of two cases with residual positive margins, one declined further surgery, and another received chemoradiotherapy. One patient recurred with distant metastatic disease, and another had locoregional nodal recurrence. The distribution of complications was significant across the pre-operative risk categories for both American Society of Anaesthesiologists and surgical risk score (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

TORS in a rural head and neck centre is a safe and viable treatment option for patients so long as this is undertaken with appropriate training, mentorship and teamwork.

The Emerging Role of Robotics in Pelvic Exenteration Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review

Pelvic exenteration surgery for locally advanced rectal cancers is a complex and extensive multivisceral operation, which is associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality rates. Significant technical challenges may arise due to inadequate access, visualisation, and characterisation of tissue planes and critical structures in the spatially constrained pelvis. Over the last two decades, robotic-assisted technologies have facilitated substantial advancements in the minimally invasive approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancers. Here, we review the emerging experience and evidence of robotic assistance in beyond TME multivisceral pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancers where heightened operative challenges and cumbersome ergonomics are likely to be encountered.

Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been applied in the clinic for decades; nevertheless, which surgical approach has a lower rate of postoperative complications is still inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative complications within 30 days between robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery based on randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (until May 2020) that compared robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc). Data regarding sample size, clinical and demographic characteristics, and postoperative complications within 30 days, including overall postoperative complications, severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III), anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, bleeding, ileus, urinary complications, respiratory complications, conversion to open surgery, unscheduled reoperation, perioperative mortality, and pathological outcomes, were extracted. The results were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials that included 507 robotic and 516 laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery cases were included. Meta-analysis showed that the overall postoperative complications within 30 days [Z = 1.1, OR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.88-1.57), P = 0.27], severe postoperative complications [Z = 0.22, OR = 1.12, 95% CI (0.41-3.07), P = 0.83], anastomotic leakage [Z = 0.96, OR = 1.27, 95% CI (0.78-2.08), P = 0.34], surgical site infection [Z = 0.18, OR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.61-1.79), P = 0.86], bleeding [Z = 0.19, OR = 0.89, 95% CI (0.27-2.97), P = 0.85], ileus [Z = 1.47, OR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.38-1.15), P = 0.14], urinary complications [Z = 0.66, OR = 1.22, 95% CI (0.67-2.22), P = 0.51], respiratory complications [Z = 0.84, OR = 0.64, 95% CI (0.22-1.82), P = 0.40], conversion to open surgery [Z = 1.73, OR = 0.61, 95% CI (0.35-1.07), P = 0.08], unscheduled reoperation [Z = 0.14, OR = 0.91, 95% CI (0.26-3.20), P = 0.89], perioperative mortality [Z = 0.28, OR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.15-4.12), P = 0.78], and pathological outcomes were similar between robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer was comparable to laparoscopic surgery with respect to postoperative complications within 30 days.

Cautiously optimistic: A survey of radiation oncology professionals' perceptions of automation in radiotherapy planning

INTRODUCTION

While there is evidence to show the positive effects of automation, the impact on radiation oncology professionals has been poorly considered. This study examined radiation oncology professionals' perceptions of automation in radiotherapy planning.

METHOD

An online survey link was sent to the chief radiation therapists (RT) of all Australian radiotherapy centres to be forwarded to RTs, medical physicists (MP) and radiation oncologists (RO) within their institution. The survey was open from May-July 2019.

RESULTS

Participants were 204 RTs, 84 MPs and 37 ROs (response rates ∼10% of the overall radiation oncology workforce). Respondents felt automation resulted in improvement in consistency in planning (90%), productivity (88%), quality of planning (57%), and staff focus on patient care (49%). When asked about perceived impact of automation, the responses were; will change the primary tasks of certain jobs (66%), will allow staff to do the remaining components of their job more effectively (51%), will eliminate jobs (20%), and will not have an impact on jobs (6%). 27% of respondents believe automation will reduce job satisfaction. 71% of respondents strongly agree/agree that automation will cause a loss of skills, while only 25% strongly agree/agree that the training and education tools in their department are sufficient.

CONCLUSION

Although the effect of automation is perceived positively, there are some concerns on loss of skillsets and the lack of training to maintain this. These results highlight the need for continued education to ensure that skills and knowledge are not lost with automation.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Robotic vs Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair With Intraperitoneal Mesh: The PROVE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh in the United States, there is no level I evidence comparing it with the traditional laparoscopic approach. This randomized clinical trial sought to demonstrate a clinical benefit to the robotic approach.

Objective

To determine whether robotic approach to ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh would result in less postoperative pain.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A registry-based, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical trial at the Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland, Ohio, completed between September 2017 and January 2020, with a minimum follow-up duration of 30 days. Two surgeons at 1 academic tertiary care hospital. Patients with primary or incisional midline ventral hernias of an anticipated width of 7 cm or less presenting in the elective setting and able to tolerate a minimally invasive repair.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to a standardized laparoscopic or robotic ventral hernia repair with fascial closure and intraperitoneal mesh.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The trial was powered to detect a 30% difference in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11) on the first postoperative day. Secondary end points included the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity short form (3a), hernia-specific quality of life, operative time, wound morbidity, recurrence, length of stay, and cost.

Results

Seventy-five patients completed their minimally invasive hernia repair: 36 laparoscopic and 39 robotic. Baseline demographics and hernia characteristics were comparable. Robotic operations had a longer median operative time (146 vs 94 minutes; P < .001). There were 2 visceral injuries in each cohort but no full-thickness enterotomies or unplanned reoperations. There were no significant differences in NRS-11 scores preoperatively or on postoperative days 0, 1, 7, or 30. Specifically, median NRS-11 scores on the first postoperative day were the same (5 vs 5; P = .61). Likewise, postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 3a and hernia-specific quality-of-life scores, as well as length of stay and complication rates, were similar. The robotic platform adds cost (total cost ratio, 1.13 vs 0.97; P = .03), driven by the cost of additional operating room time (1.25 vs 0.85; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Laparoscopic and robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh have comparable outcomes. The increased operative time and proportional cost of the robotic approach are not offset by a measurable clinical benefit.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03283982.

Public Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Medicine

Objective: To understand better the public perception and comprehension of medical technology such as artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic surgery. In addition to this, to identify sensitivity to their use to ensure acceptability and quality of counseling. Subjects and Methods: A survey was conducted on a convenience sample of visitors to the MN Minnesota State Fair (n = 264). Participants were randomized to receive one of two similar surveys. In the first, a diagnosis was made by a physician and in the second by an AI application to compare confidence in human and computer-based diagnosis. Results: The median age of participants was 45 (interquartile range 28-59), 58% were female (n = 154) vs 42% male (n = 110), 69% had completed at least a bachelor's degree, 88% were Caucasian (n = 233) vs 12% ethnic minorities (n = 31) and were from 12 states, mostly from the Upper Midwest. Participants had nearly equal trust in AI vs physician diagnoses. However, they were significantly more likely to trust an AI diagnosis of cancer over a doctor's diagnosis when responding to the version of the survey that suggested that an AI could make medical diagnoses (p = 9.32e-06). Though 55% of respondents (n = 145) reported that they were uncomfortable with automated robotic surgery, the majority of the individuals surveyed (88%) mistakenly believed that partially autonomous surgery was already happening. Almost all (94%, n = 249) stated that they would be willing to pay for a review of medical imaging by an AI if available. Conclusion: Most participants express confidence in AI providing medical diagnoses, sometimes even over human physicians. Participants generally express concern with surgical AI, but they mistakenly believe that it is already being performed. As AI applications increase in medical practice, health care providers should be cognizant of the potential amount of misinformation and sensitivity that patients have to how such technology is represented.

Robotic Cholecystectomy Is a Safe Educational Alternative to Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy During General Surgical Training: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

The role of robotic surgery in general surgery (GS) continues to expand. Several programs have integrated robotic-based simulators and models into surgical education; however, residents' robotic experience in the operating room is currently limited. We sought to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) when independently performed by GS chief residents.

METHODS

From June 2016 to October 2018, RC and laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC) performed independently by chief residents on a resident staff surgical service were prospectively included. Patient demographics, intraoperative variables, and postoperative complications were analyzed and compared between both cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 20 RC and 70 LC were included. Patient characteristics, indications for surgery, and comorbidities were similar in both groups. RC was more likely to be performed electively (95% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). No difference in operative time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative bile duct injury, or conversion to open was observed. Patients undergoing LC had an overall longer mean length of hospital stay (2.7 days ± 2.1 vs. 0.8 days ± 0.4, p < 0.001); however, length of hospital stay was similar between RC and LC performed electively (p = 0.946). No difference in postoperative complications and 30-day readmission was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

RC can be safely and independently performed by GS residents with similar outcomes as LC. Efforts should be directed toward creating a platform to bridge competent simulator skills into safe performance in the operating suite. The integration of robotic training into the core GS curriculum should be encouraged.

Multiple perceptions of robotic-assisted surgery among surgeons and patients: a cross-sectional study

Limited data exist regarding knowledge and perceptions of surgeons and patients about robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in the Middle East. This study aimed to explore perceptions of surgeons and patients about RAS. A questionnaire-based survey was distributed among surgeons of different specialties and patients. Between March and September 2019, 278 and 256 surveys were completed by surgeons and patients, respectively (95.2% and 94.8% response rate, respectively). The surgeons' self-reported experience with technology was related to the level of comfort with computers and computer literacy. Most surgeons have heard of RAS availability, and the majority agreed to its introduction into the healthcare system. However, only 75 (27%) of the surgeons thought that the surgeon has complete control over the robot, and 69 (25%) surgeons were not sure of the level of control the surgeon has over the robot reflecting poor knowledge about this technology. Less than a third of patient respondents have heard of RAS. However, half of them would consider it should they need to undergo surgery. When compared to open surgery, 23 (9%), 26 (10%), and 94 (37%) patient respondents thought that RAS caused less pain, had fewer complications, and was faster than conventional surgery, respectively. Knowledge and perceptions about RAS are limited among surgeons and patients in Kuwait. Efforts should focus on increasing awareness.

An exploratory study of public' awareness about robotics-assisted surgery in Kuwait

Background

The adoption of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) requires a clear willingness, not only from healthcare organization to operate the robotic system but also from the public that is going to perceive it. This study aims to explore public’s awareness, understanding and their perceptions towards RAS in Kuwait.

Methods

This cross-sectional study used a survey questionnaire that was disseminated on a tablet device to people at their convenience in governmental institutions.

Results

A total of 1087 people agreed to participate in this study. The study results showed that only 36.8% of respondents had heard of RAS and 27.1% knew what RAS is. Moreover, 47.6% of the respondents were uncertain about its safety, while 29.7% thought RAS was safe. The results also showed that 40.9 and 34.4% of respondents thought that RAS is more precise and faster than conventional surgical procedures, respectively, whereas 30.6% feared malfunctioning issues during surgical procedures.

Conclusion

This public survey among a Middle Eastern population reveals lack of awareness and limited understanding of RAS. However, there was a tendency towards believing that RAS may have potential advantages in terms of better outcomes compared to conventional surgical procedures.

Building a predictive model of U.S. patient willingness to undergo robotic surgery

Prior research regarding robotic surgery (RS) has largely focused on the engineering or medical aspects of these tools. A few studies have examined consumer opinions toward, or willingness to use, robotic surgeons; however, no study to date has examined what type of person would be willing to undergo RS. Across two studies, the current research fills this gap by building both a descriptive and predictive regression model used to predict what type of user would be willing to undergo RS. To build the descriptive model, 1324 potential patients were asked a series of questions about demographics, attitudes, opinions, and personalities. Results indicate that perceived value, familiarity, wariness of new technologies, fear of surgery, openness, anger, fear, and happiness are all significant predictors of willingness to undergo RS. A regression equation was developed and then used to predict scores in a second study with 1335 potential patients. The scores from both studies were compared for model fit. Several methods were used to validate the regression model, including correlational analyses, a t test, and calculation of the cross-validity coefficient. All three stringent tests showed strong model fit, explaining 62% of the variance in the model. These findings have both practical and theoretical values to the field and can be used to identify early adopters of this advanced medical technology.

Achieving robotic program best practice performance and cost versus laparoscopy: Two case studies define a framework for optimization

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is seen by many hospital administrators and surgeons as slower and more expensive than laparoscopic surgery despite the implementation of commonly held robotic best practices. Multiple factors, including surgeon learning curves and program governance, are often overlooked, precluding optimal robotic program performance.

METHODS

An assessment of several leading robotic surgery publications is presented followed by real-world case studies from two US hospitals: an existing robotic program in a mid-sized, regional hospital system and a small, rural hospital that launched a new program.

RESULTS

Improvements in robotic surgery costs/program efficiency were seen at the hospital system vs baseline at 18 months post-implementation; and high-performance robotic efficiency and cost benchmarks were matched or surpassed at the rural hospital at 1 year post-launch.

DISCUSSION

When best practices are utilized in robotic programs, surgical case times, costs, and efficiency performance metrics equaling or exceeding laparoscopy can be achieved.

Robotic Liver Resection

Robotic surgery has rapidly evolved. It is particularly attractive as an alternative minimally invasive approach in liver surgery because of improvements in visualization and articulated instruments. Limitations include increased operative times and lack of tactile feedback, but these have not been shown in studies. Considerations unique to robotic surgery, including safety protocols, must be put in place and be reviewed at the beginning of every procedure to ensure safety in the event of an emergent conversion. Despite the lack of early adoption by many hepatobiliary surgeons, robotic liver surgery continues to evolve and find its place within hepatobiliary surgery.

Integrating Robotic Technology Into Resident Training: Challenges and Recommendations From the Front Lines

PURPOSE

To develop recommendations for improving the integration of robotic technology into today's apprentice-based resident training.

METHOD

During a national meeting in 2017, 24 robotic surgeons were interviewed about their experiences integrating robotic technology into resident training. Qualitative thematic analysis of interview notes and recordings revealed themes related to challenges and recommendations.

RESULTS

Four themes emerged, each corresponding to a general recommendation for integrating robotic technology into training. The first, surgical techniques versus tools, contrasts faculty's sequential mastery-surgical techniques first, then the robotic tool-with residents' simultaneous learning. The recommendation is to create separate learning opportunities for focused skill acquisition. The second theme, timing of exposure to the robotic tool, describes trainees' initial focus on tool use for basic surgical steps. The recommendation is to increase access to basic robotic cases. The third theme covers the relationship of laparoscopic and robotic surgery. The recommendation is to emphasize similar and dissimilar features during all minimally invasive surgical cases. The fourth theme, use of the dual console (which enables two consoles to operate the robot, the primary determines the secondary's functionality), highlights the unique teaching opportunities this console creates. The recommendation is for surgeons to give verbal guidance so residents completely understand surgical techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical educators should consider technique versus tool, timing of exposure to the tool, overlapping and varying features of robotic and laparoscopic surgery, and use of the dual console as they develop curricula to ensure thorough acquisition and synthesis of all elements of robotic surgery.

Gender differences in understanding and acceptance of robot-assisted surgery

Robot-assisted surgery has numerous patient benefits compared to open surgery including smaller incisions, lower risk of infection, less post-operative pain, shorter hospital stays and a quicker return to the workforce. As such, it has become the first-choice surgical modality for several surgical procedures with the most common being prostatectomy and hysterectomy. However, research has identified that the perceptions of robot-assisted surgery among surgical patients and medical staff often do not accurately reflect the real-world situation. This study aimed to understand male and female perceptions of robot-assisted surgery with the objective of identifying the factors that might inhibit or facilitate the acceptance of robotic surgery. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 25 men/women from diverse social/ethnic backgrounds. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. The majority of female participants expressed concerns in relation to the safety and perception of new technology in surgery, whereas many male participants appeared to be unfazed by the notion of robotic surgery. There were clear differences in how males and females understood and conceptualised the robot-assisted surgical process. Whilst male participants tended to humanise the process, female participants saw it as de-humanising. There is still a discrepancy between the public perceptions of robotic surgery and the clinical reality perceived by healthcare professionals. The findings will educate medical staff and support the development of current informative techniques given to patients prior to surgery.

Autofluorescence lifetime augmented reality as a means for real-time robotic surgery guidance in human patients

Due to loss of tactile feedback the assessment of tumor margins during robotic surgery is based only on visual inspection, which is neither significantly sensitive nor specific. Here we demonstrate time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy (TRFS) as a novel technique to complement the visual inspection of oral cancers during transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in real-time and without the need for exogenous contrast agents. TRFS enables identification of cancerous tissue by its distinct autofluorescence signature that is associated with the alteration of tissue structure and biochemical profile. A prototype TRFS instrument was integrated synergistically with the da Vinci Surgical robot and the combined system was validated in swine and human patients. Label-free and real-time assessment and visualization of tissue biochemical features during robotic surgery procedure, as demonstrated here, not only has the potential to improve the intraoperative decision making during TORS but also other robotic procedures without modification of conventional clinical protocols.