A prospective, single-arm study on the use of the da Vinci® Table Motion with the Trumpf TS7000dV operating table

How robotic platforms are revolutionizing colorectal surgery techniques: a comparative review

INTRODUCTION

In the last two decades, robotic technology has fundamentally transformed the field of colorectal surgery by providing surgeons with unprecedented levels of precision and control. Nevertheless, robotic surgery presents certain challenges such as prolonged operating times, high costs, limited accessibility, and the necessity for specialized training.

AREAS COVERED

This comparative review analyzes the impact of robotic platforms on colorectal surgery and its outcomes, with the expanding market of this technology. The major databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholars were searched using the key term 'robotic assisted surgery,' 'robotic platforms,' and 'colorectal surgery' to identify relevant articles as of August 2024. The most utilized robotic platforms currently available on the market - Da Vinci, Versius, Senhance, and Revo-I - are compared through their peri- and post-operative outcomes, including operative duration, blood loss, hospitalization period, oncological outcomes, and cost, providing a comprehensive insight into the future of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery.

EXPERT OPINION

Robotic surgery significantly improves patient outcomes, including shorter postoperative recovery times and effective cancer resection margins. However, challenges faced with these platforms include longer intraoperative times, arm clashing, the need for bedside assistance, and cost. Nevertheless, with the evolution toward managing more complex rectal cancer cases and more challenging dissection planes, the need for robotic platforms will only grow.

Robotic colorectal surgery and future directions

As the adoption of robotic-assisted procedures expands across various surgical specialties, colorectal surgery stands out as a prominent beneficiary. This rise in usage can be traced back to the increased accessibility of robotic platforms and a growing institutional shift towards cutting-edge surgical methods. When compared with traditional laparoscopic methods, robotic techniques offer distinct advantages. Their true potential shines in surgeries involving complex anatomical regions, where the robot's enhanced dexterity and range of motion prove invaluable. The three-dimensional, magnified view provided by robotic systems further boosts surgical precision and clarity. These advantages render robotic assistance especially suitable for colorectal surgeries, notably in intricate areas such as the rectum and endoluminal spaces. As the medical world emphasizes minimally invasive surgical methods, there's a pressing need to evolve and optimize robotic techniques in colorectal surgery. This article traces the evolution of robotic interventions in colorectal surgeries, highlighting both its historical milestones and anticipated future trends. We'll also explore emerging robotic tools and systems set to reshape the colorectal surgical arena.

Robotic Hepatectomy plus Biliary Reconstruction for Bismuth Type III and Type IV Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: State of the Art and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

In Bismuth type III and IV Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma (III-IV HC), surgical resection is the only chance for long-term survival. As the surgical procedure is complex and Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) may be particularly suitable in this setting, the aim of this study is to evaluate the potential benefits of RAS in III-IV HC in terms of post-operative outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using the PRISMA checklist for article selection. We searched the PubMed database and included only studies with clinical data about the treatment of III-IV HC using RAS.

RESULTS

A total of 12 papers involving 50 patients were included. All cases were Bismuth IIIa (n = 18), IIIb (n = 27) or IV type (n = 5) and underwent hepatectomy with biliary confluence resection and reconstruction. The mean operative time was 500 minutes with a conversion rate of 4%. The mean hospital stay was 12.2 days, and the morbidity and 30-day mortality rate were 61.9% and 2%, respectively. Over a mean follow up period of 10.1 months, 9/18 cases experienced recurrence (50%).

CONCLUSIONS

RAS for III-IV HC is safe and feasible, at least if performed by experienced surgeons on selected cases. The oncological outcomes appear acceptable, given the aggressiveness of this pathology, but further studies are needed to fully elucidate the exact role of robotics in this setting.

Robotic-assisted surgery for colorectal liver metastasis: A single-centre experience

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the liver is increasingly widespread, its role in the treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) remains uncertain. In this setting, the role of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has not been significantly evaluated yet. The aim of this study was to report our experience with RAS for treatment of CRLM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospectively collected surgical and oncologic data on all of the robotic-assisted liver resections for CRLM performed at our centre were retrieved from the institutional database and retrospectively analysed. Intra-operative ultrasound (US) was obtained with a dedicated robotic probe using the TilePro™ function.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent robotic-assisted resection of CRLM between May 2012 and April 2018. Six patients (30%) had multiple synchronous CRLM resections (median = 2; range 2-4). The tumour size averaged 3.0 ± 1.8 cm. All of the lesions were removed using a parenchymal-sparing approach, with R0 resection margins. Mean hospital stay was 4.7 ± 1.8 days. The mean follow-up was 22.5 ± 19.5 months. During the study period, there were no local recurrences, while 9 patients (45%) developed new systemic metastasis. All patients are still alive as of September 2018 with 1- and 3-year disease-free survival of 89.5% and 35.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, RAS for CRLM surgical treatment was feasible and played a positive role even in patients with multiple metastases and previous or synchronous surgery. RAS seemed to be oncologically effective in this setting, as no patients experienced local relapse in the treated area.

Technical details and preliminary results of a full robotic type II endoleak treatment with the da Vinci Xi

Type II endoleak (T2E) represents a frequent and often challenging complication of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Endovascular treatment is the standard and most used strategy, but the recurrence after it remains high, especially due to lumbar arteries (LA) and inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) feeding. While conventional laparoscopy has been considered as an emerging method, robotic surgery is not reported yet for this indication. We herein describe our technique of minimally invasive T2E repair using a full robotic approach with the da Vinci Xi, reporting our preliminary experience with the first two patients who underwent this operation at our Institution. The procedure comprises two phases. The first phase consists of IMA ligation, left colon mobilization and infra-renal exposure of the anterior longitudinal ligament of the column and of the left side of the sac. The second phase entails the posterior aneurysm mobilization and the selective clipping of LA responsible of the T2E, as identified by the pre-operative CT scan. No intra-operative complications occurred and the average length of surgery was 183 min. The average length of hospitalization was 2.5 days. Robotic T2E repair can be considered a safe procedure and the da Vinci Xi, thanks to its increased dexterity and flexibility, allows to easily perform this multi-target operation (IMA and LA). The articulated instruments with motion scaling and tremor filtering facilitate a gently vascular dissection and an easy IMA and LA identification, dissection, and ligation. The TilePro function permits the operator to control from the console, with intra-operative color-Doppler ultrasound, the absence of residual endoleaks.

Structured cost analysis of robotic TME resection for rectal cancer: a comparison between the da Vinci Si and Xi in a single surgeon's experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery by the da Vinci Si appears to benefit rectal cancer surgery in selected patients, but still has some limitations, one of which is its high costs. Preliminary studies have indicated that the use of the new da Vinci Xi provides some added advantages, but their impact on cost is unknown. The aim of the present study is to compare surgical outcomes and costs of rectal cancer resection by the two platforms, in a single surgeon's experience.

METHODS

From April 2010 to April 2017, 90 robotic rectal resections were performed, with either the da Vinci Si (Si-RobTME) or the da Vinci Xi (Xi-RobTME). Based on CUSUM analysis, two comparable groups of 40 consecutive Si-RobTME and 40 consecutive Xi-RobTME were obtained from the prospectively collected database and used for the present retrospective comparative study. Data costs were analysed based on the level of experience on the proficiency-gain curve (p-g curve) by the surgeon with each platform.

RESULTS

In both groups, two homogeneous phases of the p-g curve were identified: Si1 and Xi1: cases 1-19, Si2 and Xi2: cases 20-40. A significantly higher number of full RAS operations were achieved in the Xi-RobTME group (p < 0.001). A statistically significant reduction in operating time (OT) during Si2 and Xi2 phase was observed (p < 0.001), accompanied by reduced overall variable costs (OVC), personnel costs (PC) and consumable costs (CC) (p < 0.001). All costs were lower in the Xi2 phase compared to Si2 phase: OT 265 versus 290 min (p = 0.052); OVC 7983 versus 10231.9 (p = 0.009); PC 1151.6 versus 1260.2 (p = 0.052), CC 3464.4 versus 3869.7 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience confirms a significant reduction of costs with increasing surgeon's experience with both platforms. However, the economic gain was higher with the Xi with shorter OT, reduced PC and CC, in addition to a significantly larger number of cases performed by the fully robotic approach.