New Robotic Platforms in General Surgery: What's the Current Clinical Scenario?

Identification of surgical human-robot interactions and measures during robotic-assisted surgery: A scoping review

This study aims to identify the dynamics of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) teams and their metrics. A scoping review across seven science, engineering, and clinical databases was conducted. It was found that literature focuses on skills and interactions centralized around the surgeon and technical components of the robotic system; however, limited literature exists on skill proceduralization specific for other surgical team members performing robotic-assisted surgery procedures. A framework that identifies the individuals (i.e., surgeon, surgical team members, and robotic platform), with their respective skill requirements (technical and nontechnical), and the required interactions among the team and RAS systems was developed. Future research in RAS human-robot interaction can address the need to understand changing dynamics and skills required by the surgical team with the continuing evolution and adoption of surgical robot technology.

The COMPARE Study: Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic, da Vinci Robotic, and Open Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Evidence

OBJECTIVE

To assess 30-day outcomes of da Vinci robotic-assisted (dV-RAS) versus laparoscopic or video-assisted thoracoscopic​​​​​ (lap/VATS) or open oncologic surgery.

BACKGROUND

Complex procedures in deep/narrow spaces especially benefit from dV-RAS. Prior procedure-specific comparisons are not generalizable.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched (latest: November 17, 2023) following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and PROSPERO (Reg#CRD42023466759). Randomized, prospective, and database studies were pooled as odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) in R using fixed effects or random effects (heterogeneity significant). ROBINS-I/RoB 2 were used to assess bias.

RESULTS

Of 56,314 unique references over 12 years from 22 countries, 230 studies (34 randomized, 74 prospective, and 122 database) comparing dV-RAS to lap/VATS or open surgery across 7 procedures, 4 specialties, representing 1,194,559 dV-RAS; 1,095,936 lap/VATS and 1,625,320 open cases were included. Operative time for dV-RAS was longer than lap/VATS [MD: 17.73 minutes (9.80, 25.67), P < 0.01] and open surgery [MD: 40.92 minutes (28.83, 53.00), P < 0.01], whereas hospital stay was shorter [lap/VATS MD: -0.51 days (-0.64, -0.38), P < 0.01; open MD: -1.85 days (-2.09, -1.62), P < 0.01] and blood loss was less versus open [MD: -293.44 mL (-359.53, -227.35)]. There were fewer dV-RAS conversions [OR: 0.44 (0.40, 0.49), P < 0.01], transfusions [OR: 0.79 (0.72, 0.88), P < 0.01], postoperative complications [OR: 0.90 (0.84, 0.96), P < 0.01], readmissions [OR: 0.91 (0.83, 0.99), P = 0.04], and deaths [OR: 0.86 (0.81, 0.92), P < 0.01] versus lap/VATS, and fewer transfusions [OR: 0.25 (0.21, 0.30), P < 0.01], postoperative complications [OR: 0.56 (0.52, 0.61), P < 0.01], readmissions [OR: 0.71 (0.63, 0.81), P < 0.01], operations [OR: 0.89 (0.81, 0.97), P < 0.01], and deaths [OR: 0.54 (0.47, 0.63), P < 0.01] versus open surgery. Blood loss [MD:- 12.26 mL (-29.44, 4.91), P = 0.16] and operations [OR: 1.03 (0.95, 1.11), P = 0.48] were similar for dV-RAS and lap/VATS. There was significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Da Vinci-RAS confers benefits across oncological procedures and study designs. These results provide clinical evidence to multispecialty-care decision-makers considering dV-RAS.

Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in colorectal cancer management: a narrative review of clinical efficacy and multidisciplinary integration

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a formidable global health challenge, ranking among the most prevalent malignancies and a principal contributor to cancer-associated mortality. While traditional open surgery has historically been the cornerstone of CRC treatment, the advent of minimally invasive techniques, particularly robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS), has garnered significant momentum owing to technological advancements in the field. Robotic platforms, exemplified by the da Vinci Surgical System, offer superior three-dimensional visualization, enhanced dexterity, and heightened precision, yielding improved perioperative outcomes, particularly in anatomically intricate regions such as the pelvis. This review provides a critical appraisal of the current landscape of RACS, emphasizing its superiority over conventional open and laparoscopic approaches. The increased control and precision afforded by robotic surgery have been shown to optimize outcomes in complex procedures such as total mesorectal excision, with evidence indicating reduced intraoperative blood loss, shortened hospital stays, and improved functional recovery. Nonetheless, challenges persist, including absence of haptic feedback, prohibitive costs, and steep learning curve associated with robotic systems. Despite these limitations, RACS has demonstrated considerable promise in sphincter-preserving and function-preserving procedures, ultimately enhancing postoperative quality of life. Beyond the surgical field, this review also investigates the integration of robotic surgery within multidisciplinary treatment strategies for CRC, particularly in the context of locally advanced rectal cancer. The combination of robotic techniques with total neoadjuvant therapy and immunotherapy-especially in tumors characterized by mismatch repair deficiency or high microsatellite instability has shown notable clinical efficacy. Furthermore, emerging personalized therapeutic approaches, including immunotherapies and targeted chemotherapeutic agents, emphasize the transformative potential of RACS in delivering superior oncologic outcomes. Looking towards the future, innovations in robotic platforms, including intraoperative imaging, artificial intelligence, and augmented reality, herald new possibilities for further enhancing the precision and efficacy of colorectal surgeries. The standardization of RACS protocols, alongside ongoing training and robust clinical research, will be critical to fully realizing the benefits of these advancements across diverse clinical settings. By incorporating cutting-edge technologies and personalized treatment methods, robotic-assisted surgery is prepared to become a cornerstone in future of CRC management, with the potential to significantly improve both survival outcomes and patient quality of life.

Implications of robotic platforms for repeat hepatectomies: a propensity score matched study of clinical outcomes

Robotic surgical approaches have demonstrated improved outcomes in primary hepatectomies. However, data on their effectiveness in redo hepatectomies (subsequent liver resections) are limited. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing primary and redo robotic hepatectomies, with additional analysis comparing outcomes of robotic versus open redo hepatectomies. With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 101 patients from a parent population of 465, who were classified as either primary (non-redo) or redo robotic hepatectomy patients between 2013 and 2023. A Propensity Score Matched (PSM) analysis was conducted to compare perioperative variables between the two cohorts, using age, sex, BMI, IWATE score, tumor size, and tumor type as matching variables. Data are presented as median (mean ± standard deviation). Significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. After 3:1 PSM analysis (3 primary patients to 1 robotic redo patient), no significant differences were observed in pre-, intra-, or postoperative variables, except for the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (p = 0.022). Additional analysis comparing robotic and open redo hepatectomies showed similar perioperative outcomes, with the robotic approach demonstrating comparable safety and feasibility. Length of stay, blood loss, operative duration, morbidity, and mortality showed no significant differences between the two groups. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III) occurred in 4% of non-redo patients, with none observed in the redo group. The findings suggest that patients undergoing redo robotic hepatectomies achieve outcomes comparable to those of primary hepatectomy patients. This indicates the potential of robotic platforms to mitigate the added complexities and risks associated with redo hepatectomies. Further multi-center collaboration is necessary to validate these findings.

Cost-effectiveness of robotic compared with laparoscopic rectal resection. Results from the Spanish prospective national trial ROBOCOSTES

OBJECTIVE

The costs related to robotic surgery are known to be greater than those associated with laparoscopy. However, the potential for better outcomes of the former could lead to a cost-effectiveness advantage. The aim of this study is therefore to highlight the difference in cost-effectiveness between robotic and laparoscopic rectal resection.

METHODS

This is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). From 2022, for 1 year, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive rectal resection were included. Quality-adjusted life year and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of robotic rectal resection and laparoscopic rectal resection . Secondary aims included clinical outcomes and quality of life.

RESULTS

Overall, 182 patients underwent rectal resection (152 anterior and 30 abdominoperineal excisions) at 14 centers, of whom 95 received robotic rectal resection and 87 laparoscopic rectal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with lesser blood loss (58.55 ± 51.68 vs 131.68 ± 191.92, P < .001), lower pain score at day 1 (-1.04 visual analog scale, P < .001) and day 7 (-0.81, P < .001) after surgery, and with fewer hospital readmissions (2.1% vs 15%, P = .005) compared with laparoscopic rectal resection. The overall costs of robotic rectal resection (including hospitalization) were 919.66 euros greater compared with laparoscopic rectal resection, but quality-adjusted life years in the robotic rectal resection group were better than laparoscopic approaches to rectal resection both at 30-day (0.8914 vs 0.8139) and 90-day (0.9573 vs 0.8740) follow-up. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was an 84.38% and 89.36% probability that robotic rectal resection was more cost-effective than laparoscopic rectal resection.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that robotic rectal resection, even if associated with greater direct costs in the short term, outperforms laparoscopic rectal resection in terms of quality-adjusted life years and should therefore be preferred where available.

Outcomes and efficacy of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy using the CMR Versius platform: a prospective study on 118 patients with 1-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes and efficacy of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the Versius robotic surgical system, aiming to provide comprehensive data on perioperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, and complications.

PATIENT AND METHODS

All cases of RARP using the CMR Versius platform performed at Cairo University Hospital over a two-year period were enrolled in this study. All patients had pathologically confirmed prostate cancer in both localized and locally advanced stages. Data were prospectively collected including preoperative parameters as patients' demographics, serum PSA, and Gleason score after trans-rectal ultrasound guided biopsy. Intraoperative parameters and complications were assessed. Postoperatively, we monitored the oncological and functional outcomes such as continence and sexual functions for at least 12 months. Follow up of PSA was done at 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, postoperatively.

RESULTS

One-hundred-and-eighteen patients continued the follow-up till 12 months. The median patient age was 64.26 ± 7.13 years. The median PSA value at diagnosis was 9 (4.16-64) ng/ml and the median prostate size was 50 (20-167) grams. The mean docking time, console time, and the total operative time were 13.17 ± 1.157, 194.75 ± 24.3 and 225.76 ± 25 min, respectively and the median blood loss was 307.46 ± 61.44 ml. The mean hospital stay and the mean catheter time were 2.16 ± 0.867 and 7.26 ± 1.441 days, respectively. Forty-nine patients underwent nerve-sparing RARP (bilateral in 41 patients and unilateral in 8 patients). Post-operative continence and potency showed progressive improvement over time during follow-up. Twelve months postoperatively, 90.7% of patients were totally continent and 49% of those patients who underwent nerve-sparing RARP (24/49) were potent.

CONCLUSION

With a positive safety profile and a successful oncological outcome, the use of the CMR system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy presents a safe and promising method in the surgical management of prostate cancer.

Recommendations on Robotic Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery. The Paris Jury-Based Consensus Conference

OBJECTIVE

To establish the first consensus guidelines on the safety and indications of robotics in Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) surgery. The secondary aim was to identify priorities for future research.

BACKGROUND

HPB robotic surgery is reaching the IDEAL 2b exploration phase for innovative technology. An objective assessment endorsed by the HPB community is timely and needed.

METHODS

The ROBOT4HPB conference developed consensus guidelines using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury produced unbiased guidelines based on the work of 10 expert panels answering predefined key questions and considering the best-quality evidence retrieved after a systematic review. The recommendations conformed with the GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies.

RESULTS

Sixty-four experts from 20 countries considered 285 studies, and the conference included an audience of 220 attendees. The jury (n=10) produced recommendations or statements covering 5 sections of robotic HPB surgery: technology, training and expertise, outcome assessment, and liver and pancreatic procedures. The recommendations supported the feasibility of robotics for most HPB procedures and its potential value in extending minimally invasive indications, emphasizing, however, the importance of expertise to ensure safety. The concept of expertise was defined broadly, encompassing requirements for credentialing HPB robotics at a given center. The jury prioritized relevant questions for future trials and emphasized the need for prospective registries, including validated outcome metrics for the forthcoming assessment of HPB robotics.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROBOT4HPB consensus represents a collaborative and multidisciplinary initiative, defining state-of-the-art expertise in HPB robotics procedures. It produced the first guidelines to encourage their safe use and promotion.

Understanding the challenges of robotic-assisted surgery adoption: Perspectives from stakeholders and the general population on human-interaction, built environment, and training

This study aims to explore adoption barriers from three aspects critical to facilitating robotic-assisted-surgery (RAS) adoption: the human-robot-interaction, built-environment, and training. Guidelines for research and design are identified from these perspectives. This study consisted of three phases: 1) surveys to RAS stakeholders and a crowd-sourcing survey; 2) stakeholder focus groups; and 3) a workshop with subject-matter experts to prioritize future research for RAS. Barriers from the human-robot-interaction perspective include hesitancy among clinicians to trust automation and physical discomfort during prolonged RAS. Barriers impeding communication and workflow disruptions were identified considering the built-environment. Training barriers were exemplified by varying curriculums from formal (courses) to informal (peer training) for surgeons. Crowd-sourced survey results suggest socio-economic status plays a role in RAS perception. Design guidelines include: 1) improved ergonomics; 2) deliberate introduction of automation; 3) sufficient in-room storage for prospective operating rooms; and 4) the development of compact RAS devices for older/smaller rooms.

Upcoming multi-visceral robotic surgery systems: a SAGES review

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgical procedures continue to increase both in the United States (US) and worldwide. Several novel robotic surgical platforms are under development or undergoing regulatory approval. This review explores robotic platforms that are expected to reach US consumers within the next 2-3 years.

METHODS

The SAGES Robotic Platforms Working Group identified robotic surgery platforms in various stages of development and selected multi-visceral systems nearing or completing the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. We outline key system components including architecture, unique features, development status, regulatory approval, and expected markets.

RESULTS

We identified twenty robotic platforms that met our selection criteria. Ten companies were based in North America, and ten were based in Europe or Asia. Each system is described in detail and key features are summarized in table form for easy comparison.

CONCLUSION

The emergence of novel robotic surgical platforms represents an important evolution in the growth of minimally invasive surgery. Increased competition has the potential to bring value to surgical patients by stimulating innovation and driving down cost. The impact of these platforms remains to be determined, but the continued growth of robotic surgery seems to be all but assured.

Robotic minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair with the Dexter robotic system™: A prospective multicenter clinical investigation

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (rTAPP) has been established with various robotic platforms. The Dexter robotic system is an open platform consisting of a sterile surgeon's console, two robotic instrument arms, and one robotic endoscope arm. This study aimed to confirm the perioperative and early postoperative safety and clinical performance of the Dexter system in patients undergoing primary transperitoneal inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

The primary objectives of this multicenter study conducted at three centers in France, Germany, and Switzerland were to document the successful completion of rTAPP procedures and the occurrence of serious adverse events (Clavien-Dindo grades III-V), device-related events up to 30 days post-surgery. The procedures were performed by three surgeons with varying levels of experience in robotic systems.

RESULTS

50 patients with a median age of 62.5 years (IQR 51.0-72.0) and BMI of 25.1 kg/cm2 (IQR 23.5-28.7), respectively, underwent inguinal hernia repair (33 unilateral, 17 bilateral). All surgeries were successfully completed using three standard laparoscopy trocars. There were no conversions to open surgery, intraoperative complications or device deficiencies. The median skin-to-skin operative time was 50 min (IQR 45-60) for unilateral hernias and 96 min (IQR 84-105) for bilateral hernias. The median console time was 30 min (IQR 26-41) for unilateral and 66 min (IQR 60-77) for bilateral hernias. Twenty-six patients were discharged on the day of surgery, and 22 on postoperative day 1.

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the use of the Dexter system in rTAPP was feasible and safe in multicenter cohorts, with operative times consistent with the literature on other robotic platforms. Our data demonstrated the accessibility of this new robotic approach, even when adopted by surgeons new to robotics. The Dexter system emerged as a valuable device in the hernia repair toolkit for both experienced robotic surgeons and those new to the field.

Total Mesorectal Excision with New Robotic Platforms: A Scoping Review

Colorectal surgery is one of the specialties that have significantly benefited from the adoption of robotic technology. Over 20 years since the first robotic rectal resection, the Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci system remains the predominant platform. The introduction of new robotic systems into the market has enabled the first documented total mesorectal excision (TME) using alternative platforms. This scoping review aimed to assess the role and adoption of these emerging robotic systems in performing TME for rectal cancer surgery. Methods: A comprehensive search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to August 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Results: Thirty-six studies were included in the review. The majority of rectal surgical procedures were performed using eight different robotic platforms. Intraoperative, short-term, and functional outcomes were generally favorable. However, pathological results were frequently incomplete. Several studies identified the lack of advanced robotic instruments as a significant limitation. Conclusions: The quality of the resected specimen is critical in rectal cancer surgery. Although TME performed with new robotic platforms appears to be feasible and safe, the current body of literature is limited, particularly in the assessment of pathological and long-term survival outcomes.

Internal validation of the Tampa Robotic Difficulty Scoring System: real-time assessment of the novel robotic scoring system in predicting clinical outcomes after hepatectomy

INTRODUCTION

As the robotic approach in hepatectomy gains prominence, the need to establish a robotic-specific difficulty scoring system (DSS) is evident. The Tampa Difficulty Score was conceived to bridge this gap, offering a novel and dedicated robotic DSS aimed at improving preoperative surgical planning and predicting potential clinical challenges in robotic hepatectomies. In this study, we internally validated the recently published Tampa DSS by applying the scoring system to our most recent cohort of patients.

METHODS

The Tampa Difficulty Score was applied to 170 recent patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy in our center. Patients were classified into: Group 1 (score 1-8, n = 23), Group 2 (score 9-24, n = 120), Group 3 (score 25-32, n = 20), and Group 4 (score 33-49, n = 7). Key variables for each of the groups were analyzed and compared. Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Notable correlations were found between the Tampa Difficulty Score and key clinical parameters such as operative duration (p < 0.0001), estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001), and percentage of major resection (p = 0.00007), affirming the score's predictive capacity for operative technical complexity. The Tampa Difficulty Score also correlated with major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) (p < 0.0001), length of stay (p = 0.011), and 30-day readmission (p = 0.046) after robotic hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tampa Difficulty Score, through the internal validation process, has confirmed its effectiveness in predicting intra- and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy. The predictive capacity of this system is useful in preoperative surgical planning and risk categorization. External validation is necessary to further explore the accuracy of this robotic DSS.

Smart Operating Room in Digestive Surgery: A Narrative Review

The introduction of new technologies in current digestive surgical practice is progressively reshaping the operating room, defining the fourth surgical revolution. The implementation of black boxes and control towers aims at streamlining workflow and reducing surgical error by early identification and analysis, while augmented reality and artificial intelligence augment surgeons' perceptual and technical skills by superimposing three-dimensional models to real-time surgical images. Moreover, the operating room architecture is transitioning toward an integrated digital environment to improve efficiency and, ultimately, patients' outcomes. This narrative review describes the most recent evidence regarding the role of these technologies in transforming the current digestive surgical practice, underlining their potential benefits and drawbacks in terms of efficiency and patients' outcomes, as an attempt to foresee the digestive surgical practice of tomorrow.

The Combination of Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery: First Experience with the Dexter Robotic System™ in Visceral Surgery

INTRODUCTION

For over two decades, abdominal surgical procedures have been safely performed robotically. After the first patent expiration, alternative robotic systems entered the market. The Dexter Robotic System™ is a small-format, modular, and robotic platform consisting of a surgeon's console, two patient carts with instrument arms, and one endoscope arm. We report our initial experiences with Dexter since its installation at our visceral surgery department.

METHODS

The system and surgical setup are described. Demographic and perioperative data of all operated patients as well as the system docking times were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 56 procedures performed with Dexter, the most common ones included cholecystectomy (n = 15), inguinal hernia repair (TAPP; unilateral n = 15; bilateral n = 3), and right oncologic hemicolectomy (n = 15). The median docking time was 6 min (2-16 min) and was reduced to 4 min in the last tertile of procedures performed.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, Dexter can be implemented without any major challenges, and visceral surgical procedures of simple to medium complexity can be performed safely. The simplicity and accessibility of the system along with the ease of switching between robotics and laparoscopy could be particularly suitable for beginners in robotic surgery.

First worldwide report on rectal resections with Hugo™ surgical system: description of docking angles and tips for an effective setup

BACKGROUNDS

Rectal robotic surgery gained momentum in the last decade, but it is still associated with not-negligible costs. In order to reduce costs, recently different robotic systems have received approval for clinical use. This study aims to present the first case series of rectal resection with the novel cost-effective platform Robotic Assisted Surgery (RAS) Hugo™. Tips for effective set up of the system and detailed configuration of tilt and docking angles are also provided.

METHODS

Three cases of rectal resection with Hugo RAS™ system are reported. After the first two cases of resection with partial mesorectal excision in which surgeries were performed with the setup proposed by the vendor company, in the third case we tested a novel setup that allowed a full robotic low rectal resection performing vascular ligations, TME and colonic splenic flexure mobilization without the need of any de-docking.

RESULTS

Our first three robotic rectal resections with the Hugo RAS™ system were completed without complications with a median docking time of 12 min (range 8-15) and a median console time of 345 minutes (range 271-475). In the first two cases, hybrid robotic and laparoscopic surgeries were performed to obtain an adequate haemostasis and traction during the pelvic phase. In the third case, a full robotic TME was successfully accomplished.

CONCLUSION

Our experience demonstrates that a full robotic low rectal resection with TME with Hugo™ RAS system is feasible, safe and associated with satisfactory postoperative outcomes.

Role of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Public Health: Its Advantages and Challenges

The modern hospital setting is closely related to engineering and technology. In a hospital, modern equipment is abundant in every department, including the operating room, intensive care unit, and laboratories. Thus, the quality of treatment provided in hospitals and technology advancements are closely tied. Robotic systems are used to support and improve the accuracy and agility of human surgeons during medical procedures. This surgical approach is commonly referred to as robotic surgery or robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). These systems are not entirely autonomous; they are managed by skilled surgeons who carry out procedures with improved accuracy and minimized invasiveness using a console and specialized instruments. Because RAS offers increased surgical precision, less discomfort after surgery, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery time, all of which improve patient outcomes and lessen the strain on healthcare resources, it plays a critical role in public health. Its minimally invasive technique benefits patients and the healthcare system by lowering problems, reducing the requirement for blood transfusions, and reducing the danger of infections related to medical care. Furthermore, the possibility of remote surgery via robotic systems can increase access to specialized care, reducing regional differences and advancing fairness in public health. In this review article, we will be covering how RAS has its role in public health.

Need for formalized robotic training and curriculum in obstetrics and gynecology residency: an examination of current resident outlooks and perspectives

The objectives of this study were to evaluate current robotic surgery training methodologies for ACGME-accredited obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) residency programs, better understand current resident perspectives, and explore potential areas for improvement within resident education. A cross-sectional study was done of ACGME-accredited OB/GYN residents in the 2023-2024 academic year. The study was done on a national setting via web-based survey. 75 surveys were included. The study was conducted via a 33-question survey study using a mixture of multiple choice, multiple answer, and Likert scale questions. Participants noted that 98.7% of their institutions perform robotic surgery and 90.7% have access to robotic console trainers. Outside of the operating room, slightly more than half of participants (57.3%) have formalized robotics training curriculums. A variety of training modalities were noted to be utilized by residents with the most helpful being hands-on training (67.7%) followed by dual-assist console (45.6%). The least helpful was noted to be online modules (58.7%). Most residents either strongly agree (45.3%) or agree (36.0%) that standardized robotics curriculums should be implemented for all OB/GYN residency programs. The largest barriers to completion of this training were noted to be attending comfort with resident participation in the case (74.0%), personal time (58.9%), and availability or access to trainers (42.5%). A formalized and standardized robotic training curriculum should be considered for OB/GYN residents with a multi-modal model utilizing a combination of training modalities as well as dedicated didactic hours.

Single-incision Laparoscopic Colonic Surgery: A Systemic Review, Meta-analysis, and Future Prospect

Although single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained some attention as a feasible alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) in colonic surgery, it became less prevalent than expected. Hence, we conducted this systematic review to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with meta-analysis and discussion of the future prospect of SILS. The search was conducted from September to October 2023 using PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Articles on colorectal cancer comparing SILC with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) from all randomized controlled trials and comparative studies with 50 patients or more per arm were examined. The primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative complication rates, and the secondary outcomes were the perioperative and oncological outcomes. The trends of the SILS number in Japan and the trends of the number of articles on SILS in PubMed were also reviewed. There were no significant differences in perioperative complication rates, operative factors, and oncological outcomes between SILC and MPLC, although heterogeneity was observed mainly in operative factors and the total length of the skin incision was significantly shorter in SILC. Therefore, SILC is technically and oncologically feasible and safe when performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. The case number of SILS was gradually increasing but the rate of SILS was decreasing in Japan. The number of articles on SILS was also decreasing. SILS has gained foothold to some extent but has plateaued. The emerging new robotic platform may reappraise the concept of SILS.

Transferability of Technical Skills Across Robotic Surgery Platforms: A Scoping Review

As the application of robotic approaches to surgery continues to broaden, new consoles have been introduced to the market. Due to the global utilization of a single platform, previously validated curricula have not been assessed on new robotic systems. Surgery by its nature occurs in a high-stakes environment, potentially exacerbated by non-standardized robotic systems. The aim of this review is to critique the evidence available regarding the transferability of technical skills across robotic platforms. A scoping review utilizing the Medline (Pubmed) and Cochrane Databases was conducted. Full texts were reviewed and appraised. Selected articles were eligible for inclusion if they investigated the ability or implications of the transfer of skill across robotic platforms. Data was extracted, coded inductively, and themes synthesized. NVIVO software was used as an adjunct for this qualitative analysis. Following the removal of duplicates a total of 278 papers were screened according to the eligibility criteria. Fifty full-text articles were reviewed and four met the criterion for inclusion. Novices' performance across platforms was comparable. Increasing levels of prior robotic experience revealed an improvement in technical performance on a novel robotic platform. Safety metrics appear comparable across systems. Quantifying learning curves across robotic platforms and their implications for the robotic surgeon in training remains to be determined. Future research needs to address the gaps in the literature by clearly defining the extent of technical skills transfer between robotic platforms. These factors will guide the next iteration of surgical training curriculums and regulations for robotic surgery.

Review of robotic surgery platforms and end effectors

In the last 50 years, the number of companies producing automated devices for surgical operations has grown extensively. The population started to be more confident about the technology capabilities. The first patents related to surgical robotics are expiring and this knowledge is becoming a common base for the development of future surgical robotics. The review describes some of the most popular companies manufacturing surgical robots. The list of the company does not pretend to be exhaustive but wishes to give an overview of the sector. Due to space constraints, only a limited selction of companies is reported. Most of the companies described are born in America or Europe. Advantages and limitations of each product firm are described. A special focus is given to the end effectors; their shape and dexterity are crucial for the positive outcome of the surgical operations. New robots are developed every year, and existing robots are allowed to perform a wider range of procedures. Robotic technologies improve the abilities of surgeons in the domains of urology, gynecology, neurology, spine surgery, orthopedic reconstruction (knee, shoulder), hair restoration, oral surgery, thoracic surgery, laparoscopic surgery, and endoscopy.

The Smokers Health Multiple ACtions (SMAC-1) Trial: Study Design and Results of the Baseline Round

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening with low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality in high-risk subjects. Cigarette smoking is linked to up to 90% of lung cancer deaths. Even more so, it is a key risk factor for many other cancers and cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases. The Smokers health Multiple ACtions (SMAC-1) trial aimed to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of an integrated program based on the early detection of smoking-related thoraco-cardiovascular diseases in high-risk subjects, combined with primary prevention. A new multi-component screening design was utilized to strengthen the framework on conventional lung cancer screening programs. We report here the study design and the results from our baseline round, focusing on oncological findings.

METHODS

High-risk subjects were defined as being >55 years of age and active smokers or formers who had quit within 15 years (>30 pack/y). A PLCOm2012 threshold >2% was chosen. Subject outreach was streamlined through media campaign and general practitioners' engagement. Eligible subjects, upon written informed consent, underwent a psychology consultation, blood sample collection, self-evaluation questionnaire, spirometry, and LDCT scan. Blood samples were analyzed for pentraxin-3 protein levels, interleukins, microRNA, and circulating tumor cells. Cardiovascular risk assessment and coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring were performed. Direct and indirect costs were analyzed focusing on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life years gained in different scenarios. Personalized screening time-intervals were determined using the "Maisonneuve risk re-calculation model", and a threshold <0.6% was chosen for the biennial round.

RESULTS

In total, 3228 subjects were willing to be enrolled. Out of 1654 eligible subjects, 1112 participated. The mean age was 64 years (M/F 62/38%), with a mean PLCOm2012 of 5.6%. Former and active smokers represented 23% and 77% of the subjects, respectively. At least one nodule was identified in 348 subjects. LDCTs showed no clinically significant findings in 762 subjects (69%); thus, they were referred for annual/biennial LDCTs based on the Maisonneuve risk (mean value = 0.44%). Lung nodule active surveillance was indicated for 122 subjects (11%). Forty-four subjects with baseline suspicious nodules underwent a PET-FDG and twenty-seven a CT-guided lung biopsy. Finally, a total of 32 cancers were diagnosed, of which 30 were lung cancers (2.7%) and 2 were extrapulmonary cancers (malignant pleural mesothelioma and thymoma). Finally, 25 subjects underwent lung surgery (2.25%). Importantly, there were zero false positives and two false negatives with CT-guided biopsy, of which the patients were operated on with no stage shift. The final pathology included lung adenocarcinomas (69%), squamous cell carcinomas (10%), and others (21%). Pathological staging showed 14 stage I (47%) and 16 stage II-IV (53%) cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

LDCTs continue to confirm their efficacy in safely detecting early-stage lung cancer in high-risk subjects, with a negligible risk of false-positive results. Re-calculating the risk of developing lung cancer after baseline LDCTs with the Maisonneuve model allows us to optimize time intervals to subsequent screening. The Smokers health Multiple ACtions (SMAC-1) trial offers solid support for policy assessments by policymakers. We trust that this will help in developing guidelines for the large-scale implementation of lung cancer screening, paving the way for better outcomes for lung cancer patients.

Clinical applications of robotic surgery platforms: a comprehensive review

Robotic surgery has expanded globally across various medical specialties since its inception more than 20 years ago. Accompanying this expansion were significant technological improvements, providing tremendous benefits to patients and allowing the surgeon to perform with more precision and accuracy. This review lists some of the different types of platforms available for use in various clinical applications. We performed a literature review of PubMed and Web of Science databases in May 2023, searching for all available articles describing surgical robotic platforms from January 2000 (the year of the first approved surgical robot, da Vinci® System, by Intuitive Surgical) until May 1st, 2023. All retrieved robotic platforms were then divided according to their clinical application into four distinct groups: soft tissue robotic platforms, orthopedic robotic platforms, neurosurgery and spine platforms, and endoluminal robotic platforms. Robotic surgical technology has undergone a rapid expansion over the last few years. Currently, multiple robotic platforms with specialty-specific applications are entering the market. Many of the fields of surgery are now embracing robotic surgical technology. We review some of the most important systems in clinical practice at this time.