En-block butterfly excision of posterior compartment deep endometriosis: The first experience with the new surgical robot Hugo™ RAS

Minimally Invasive Rectal Surgery: Current Status and Future Perspectives in the Era of Digital Surgery

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive approaches in rectal surgery have changed the landscape of surgical interventions, impacting both malignant and benign pathologies. The dynamic nature of rectal cancer treatment owes much to innovations in surgical techniques, reflected in the expanding literature on available treatment modalities. Local excision, facilitated by minimally invasive surgery, offers curative potential for patients with early T1 rectal cancers and favorable pathologic features. For more complex cases, laparoscopic and robotic surgery have demonstrated significant efficacy and provided precise, durable outcomes while reducing perioperative morbidity and enhancing postoperative recovery. Additionally, advancements in imaging, surgical instrumentation, and enhanced recovery protocols have further optimized patient care. The integration of multidisciplinary care has also emerged as a cornerstone of treatment, emphasizing collaboration among surgeons, oncologists, and radiologists to deliver personalized, evidence-based care. This narrative review aims to elucidate current minimally invasive surgical techniques and approaches for rectal pathologies, spanning benign and malignant conditions, while also exploring future directions in the field, including the potential role of artificial intelligence and next-generation robotic platforms.

The vaginal route for minimally invasive surgery: a practical guide for general surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Vaginal approaches have become routine in the field of gynecologic surgery, whereas in general surgery vaginal wall transection is an infrequent practice typically reserved for extensive tumor resections. Approximately two decades ago, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) revolutionized conventional boundaries by accessing the peritoneal cavity transorally, transrectally, or transvaginally, enabling general surgery without visible scars. Although transvaginal approaches have been successfully used for various abdominal procedures by general surgeons, a gap remains in comprehensive training to fully exploit the potential of this route.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases were searched to retrieve relevant articles illustrating how general surgeons can adeptly manage vaginal approaches.

RESULTS

The article presents a practical framework for general surgeons to execute a complete vaginal approach, addressing the management of vaginal specimen extraction and vaginal cuff closure, even in the absence of an experienced gynecologist.

CONCLUSION

The evolution of abdominal surgery is moving towards less invasive techniques, emphasizing the importance of understanding the nuances and challenges associated with the vaginal route. This approach is linked to minimal oncological, sexual, and infective complications, and to the absence of pregnancy-related complications. Such knowledge becomes increasingly crucial, particularly with the renewed demand for transvaginal access in robot-assisted NOTES procedures.

Clash of the Titans: the first multi-center retrospective comparative study between da Vinci and Hugo™ RAS surgical systems for the treatment of deep endometriosis

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of several robotic platforms presents an opportunity to pinpoint the most suitable system for specific procedures and patient profiles. This study aims to explore differences in complications and functional outcomes among patients undergoing deep endometriosis excision with the da Vinci surgical system compared to the Hugo™ RAS system.

METHOD

This is a retrospective, multicenter cohort study. Patients were categorized based on the surgical system used: the Da Vinci system and the Hugo™ RAS system. Perioperative complications, functional outcomes (via validated questionnaire: BFLUTS, KESS, GIQLI), and pain symptoms both before and after surgery were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of six postoperative complications were reported: four in the Da Vinci system group (20%) and two in the Hugo™ RAS system group (12.5%). No difference in the mean operative time (p = 0.647), median estimated blood loss (p = 0.179), and hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was found between the two groups. A significant difference was reported in questionnaire score changes and dyspareunia severity in the da Vinci system arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Both robotic systems offer comparable performances in terms of intraoperative complications, although there was a higher incidence of postoperative complications in patients who underwent surgery with the Da Vinci system. Moreover, there was an improvement in dyspareunia, urinary, and gastrointestinal function in the same group.

Robotic platforms in gynaecological surgery: past, present, and future

Background

More than two decades ago, the advent of robotic laparoscopic surgery marked a significant milestone, featuring the introduction of the AESOP robotic endoscope control system and the ZEUS robotic surgery system. The latter, equipped with distinct arms for the laparoscope and surgical instruments, was designed to accommodate remote connections, enabling the practice of remote telesurgery as early as 2001. Subsequent technological progress has given rise to a range of options in today's market, encompassing multi-port and single-port systems, both rigid and flexible, across various price points, with further growth anticipated.

Objective

This article serves as an indispensable guide for gynaecological surgeons with an interest in embracing robotic surgery.

Materials and methods

Drawing insights from the experience of the Strasbourg training centre for minimally invasive surgery (IRCAD), this article offers a comprehensive overview of existing robotic platforms in the market, as well as those in development.

Results

Robotic surgical systems not only streamline established operative methods but also broaden the scope of procedures, including intra- and transluminal surgeries. As integral components of the digital surgery ecosystem, these robotic systems actively contribute to the increasing integration and adoption of advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence-based data analysis and support systems.

Conclusion

Robotic surgery is increasingly being adopted in clinical practice. With the growing number of systems available on the marketplace, the primary challenge lies in identifying the optimal platform for each specific procedure and patient. The seamless integration of robotic systems with artificial intelligence, image-guided surgery, and telesurgery presents undeniable advantages, enhancing the precision and effectiveness of surgical interventions.

What is new?

This article provides a guide to the robotic platforms available on the market and those in development for gynaecologists interested in robotic surgery.

Robotic assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for deep endometriosis: a meta-analysis of current evidence

Endometriosis is a benign inflammatory onco-mimetic disease affecting 10-15% of women in the world. When it is refractory to medical treatments, surgery may be required. Usually, laparoscopy is the preferred approach, but robotic surgery has gained popularity in the last 15 years. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RAS) versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (LPS) in the treatment of endometriosis. This study adheres to PRISMA guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO. Studies reporting perioperative data comparing RAS and LPS surgery in patients with endometriosis querying PubMed, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were included in the analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool (QUADAS-2) was used for the quality assessment of the selected articles. Fourteen studies were identified, including 2709 patients with endometriosis stage I-IV for the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between RAS and LPS in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversion rate and estimated blood loss. However, patients in the RAS group have a longer operative time (p < 0.0001) and longer hospital stay (p = 0.020) than those in the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery is not inferior to laparoscopy in patients with endometriosis in terms of surgical outcomes; however, RAS requires longer operative times and longer hospital stay. The benefits of robotic surgery should be sought in the easiest potential integration of robotic platforms with new technologies. Prospective studies comparing laparoscopy to the new robotic systems are desirable for greater robustness of scientific evidence.

Ultrasound-guided robotic surgical procedures: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Ultrasound has been nicknamed "the surgeon's stethoscope". The advantages of laparoscopic ultrasound beyond a substitute for the sense of touch are considerable, especially for robotic surgery. Being able to see through parenchyma and into vascular structures enables to avoid unnecessary dissection by providing a thorough assessment at every stage without the need for contrast media or ionising radiation. The limitations of restricted angulation and access within the abdominal cavity during laparoscopy can be overcome by robotic handling of miniaturised ultrasound probes and the use of various and specific frequencies will meet tissue- and organ-specific characteristics. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the reported applications of intraoperative ultrasound-guided robotic surgery and to outline future perspectives.

METHODS

The study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to October 2023. Manuscripts reporting data on ultrasound-guided robotic procedures were included in the qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

20 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority (53%) were related to the field of general surgery during liver, pancreas, spleen, gallbladder/bile duct, vascular and rectal surgery. This was followed by other fields of oncological surgery (42%) including urology, lung surgery, and retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for metastases. Among the studies, ten (53%) focused on locating tumoral lesions and defining resection margins, four (15%) were designed to test the feasibility of robotic ultrasound-guided surgery, while two (10.5%) aimed to compare robotic and laparoscopic ultrasound probes. Additionally two studies (10.5%) evaluated the robotic drop-in probe one (5%) assessed the hepatic tissue consistency and another one (5%) aimed to visualize the blood flow in the splenic artery.

CONCLUSION

The advantages of robotic instrumentation, including ergonomics, dexterity, and precision of movements, are of relevance for robotic intraoperative ultrasound (RIOUS). The present systematic review demonstrates the virtue of RIOUS to support surgeons and potentially reduce minimally invasive procedure times.

Robotic surgery for deep-infiltrating endometriosis: is it time to take a step forward?

Endometriosis is a chronic debilitating disease that affects nearly 10% of women of the reproductive age. Although the treatment modalities of endometriosis are numerous, surgical excision of the endometriotic implants and nodules remains the sole cytoreductive approach. Laparoscopic excision of endometriosis was proven to be beneficial in improving the postoperative pain and fertility. Moreover, it was also proved to be safe and efficient in treating the visceral localization of deep endometriosis, such as urinary and colorectal endometriosis. More recently, robotic-assisted surgery gained attention in the field of endometriosis surgery. Although the robotic technology provides a 3D vision of the surgical field and 7-degree of freedom motion, the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of this approach are yet to be determined. With this paper, we aim to review the available evidence regarding the role of robotic surgery in the management of endometriosis along with the current practices in the field.