nach oben

Journal of Robotic Surgery

Erschienen in:

01.12.2024 | Review

Advancements in robotic surgery: innovations, challenges and future prospects

verfasst von: Swastika Chatterjee, Soumyajit Das, Karabi Ganguly, Dibyendu Mandal

Erschienen in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The use of robots has revolutionized healthcare, wherein further innovations have led to improved precision and accuracy. Conceived in the late 1960s, robot-assisted surgeries have evolved to become an integral part of various surgical specialties. Modern robotic surgical systems are equipped with highly dexterous arms and miniaturized instruments that reduce tremors and enable delicate maneuvers. Implementation of advanced materials and designs along with the integration of imaging and visualization technologies have enhanced surgical accuracy and made robots safer and more adaptable to various procedures. Further, the haptic feedback system allows surgeons to determine the consistency of the tissues they are operating upon, without physical contact, thereby preventing injuries due to the application of excess force. With the implementation of teleoperation, surgeons can now overcome geographical limitations and provide specialized healthcare remotely. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) aids in surgical decision-making by improving the recognition of minute and complex anatomical structures. All these advancements have led to faster recovery and fewer complications in patients. However, the substantial cost of robotic systems, their maintenance, the size of the systems and proper surgeon training pose major challenges. Nevertheless, with future advancements such as AI-driven automation, nanorobots, microscopic incision surgeries, semi-automated telerobotic systems, and the impact of 5G connectivity on remote surgery, the growth curve of robotic surgery points to innovation and stands as a testament to the persistent pursuit of progress in healthcare.

Mehta A, Cheng Ng J, Andrew Awuah W, Huang H, Kalmanovich J, Agrawal A, Abdul-Rahman T, Hasan MM, Sikora V, Isik A (2022) Embracing robotic surgery in low- and middle-income countries: potential benefits, challenges, and scope in the future. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 84:104803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104803CrossRefPubMed

George EI, Brand TC, LaPorta A, Marescaux J, Satava RM (2018) Origins of Robotic Surgery: From Skepticism to Standard of Care. JSLS 22(4):e2018.00039. https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2018.00039CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Davies B (2000) A review of robotics in surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 214(1):129–140. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411001535309CrossRefPubMed

Paul HA, Bargar WL, Mittlestadt B, Musits B, Taylor RH, Kazanzides P, Zuhars J, Williamson B, Hanson W (1992) Development of a surgical robot for cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 285:57–66CrossRef

Harris S, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q et al (1997) The Probot—an active robot for prostate resection. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H. N Engl J Med 211:317–325. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411971534449CrossRef

Satava RM (2002) Surgical robotics: the early chronicles: a personal historical perspective. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12(1):6–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/00129689-200202000-00002CrossRefPubMed

Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239(1):14–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000103020.19595.7dCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dwivedi J, Mahgoub I (2012) Robotic surgery—a review on recent advances in surgical robotic systems

Lafaro KJ, Stewart C, Fong A, Fong Y (2020) Robotic liver resection. Surg Clin North Am 100(2):265–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2019.11.003CrossRefPubMed

10.

Díaz CE, Fernández R, Armada M, García Gutiérrez FdJ (2015) State of the art in robots used in minimally invasive surgeries. Natural orifice transluminal surgery (NOTES) as a particular case. Ind Robot 42(6):508–532. https://doi.org/10.1108/IR-03-2015-0055CrossRef

11.

Díaz CE, Fernández R, Armada M, García F (2017) A research review on clinical needs, technical requirements, and normativity in the design of surgical robots. Int J Med Rob Comp Ass Surg. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1801CrossRef

12.

Cepolina F, Razzoli RP (2022) An introductory review of robotically assisted surgical systems. Int J Med Robot. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2409CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Runciman M, Darzi A, Mylonas GP (2019) Soft robotics in minimally invasive surgery. Soft Robot 6(4):423–443. https://doi.org/10.1089/soro.2018.0136CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Kim J, de Mathelin M, Ikuta K, Kwon DS (2022) Advancement of flexible robot technologies for endoluminal surgeries. Proc IEEE 110(7):909–931. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2022.3170109CrossRef

15.

Li Z, Wang L, Wu L, Alambeigi F, Cheng SS (2022) Editorial: flexible surgical robotics: design, modeling, sensing and control. Front Robot AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.854024CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Zhang L, Yuan Q, Xu Y, Wang W (2020) Comparative clinical outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 15(10):10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240593CrossRef

17.

Qian L, Wu JY, DiMaio SP, Navab N, Kazanzides P (2020) a review of augmented reality in robotic-assisted surgery. IEEE Trans Med Robot Bionics 2(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMRB.2019.2957061CrossRef

18.

Sastry SS, Cohn M, Tendick F (1997) Milli-robotics for remote, minimally invasive surgery. Robot Auton Syst 21(3):305–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8890(96)00082-6CrossRef

19.

Patel RV, Atashzar SF, Tavakoli M (2022) Haptic Feedback And Force-Based Teleoperation In Surgical Robotics. Proc IEEE 110(7):1012–1027. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2022.3180052CrossRef

20.

Raison N, Khan MS, Challacombe B (2015) Telemedicine in surgery: what are the opportunities and hurdles to realising the potential? Curr Urol Rep 16(7):43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0522-xCrossRefPubMed

21.

Mohan A, Wara UU, Arshad Shaikh MT, Rahman RM, Zaidi ZA (2021) Telesurgery and robotics: an improved and efficient era. Cureus 13(3):e14124. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.14124CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Reichenbach M, Frederick T, Cubrich L, Bircher W, Bills N, Morien M et al (2017) Telesurgery with miniature robots to leverage surgical expertise in distributed expeditionary environments. Mil Med 182(1):316–321. https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00176CrossRefPubMed

23.

Hashimoto DA, Rosman G, Rus D, Meireles OR (2018) Artificial intelligence in surgery: promises and perils. Ann Surg 268(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002693CrossRefPubMed

24.

Deo RC (2015) Machine Learning in Medicine. Circulation 132(20):1920–1930. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.001593CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) The reinforcement learning problem. Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 51–85

26.

Bothe MK, Dickens L, Reichel K, Tellmann A, Ellger B, Westphal M et al (2013) The use of reinforcement learning algorithms to meet the challenges of an artificial pancreas. Expert Rev Med Devices 10(5):661–673CrossRefPubMed

27.

DiPietro R, Lea C, Malpani A, Ahmidi N, Vedula S, Lee GI, et al (2016) Recognizing surgical activities with recurrent neural networks. In: International Conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, pp 551–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46720-7_64.

28.

Zappella L, Béjar B, Hager G, Vidal R (2013) Surgical gesture classification from video and kinematic data. Med Image Anal 17(7):732–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2013.04.007CrossRefPubMed

29.

Moustris GP, Hiridis SC, Deliparaschos KM, Konstantinidis KM (2011) Evolution of autonomous and semi-autonomous robotic surgical systems: a review of the literature. Int J Med Robot 7(4):375–392. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.408CrossRefPubMed

30.

Shademan A, Decker RS, Opfermann JD, Leonard S, Krieger A, Kim PCW (2016) Supervised autonomous robotic soft tissue surgery. Sci Transl Med 8(337):337. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aad9398CrossRef

31.

Oliveira CM, Nguyen HT, Ferraz AR, Watters K, Rosman B, Rahbar R (2012) Robotic surgery in otolaryngology and head and neck surgery: a review. Minim Invasive Surg. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/286563CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW, Snyder W, Sherman E, Quon H (2007) Transoral robotic surgery: radical tonsillectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 133(12):1220–1226. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.133.12.1220CrossRefPubMed

33.

Dziegielewski PT, Teknos TN, Durmus K, Old M, Agrawal A, Kakarala K et al (2013) Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal cancer: long-term quality of life and functional outcomes. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 10:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2013.2747CrossRef

34.

Lee SY, Park YM, Byeon HK, Choi EC, Kim SH (2014) Comparison of oncologic and functional outcomes after transoral robotic lateral oropharyngectomy versus conventional surgery for T1 to T3 tonsillar cancer. Head Neck 36(8):1138–1145. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23424CrossRefPubMed

35.

Lawson G, Matar N, Remacle M, Jamart J, Bachy V (2011) Transoral robotic surgery for the management of head and neck tumors: learning curve 268(12):1795–1801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1537-7CrossRef

36.

Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Yun JS, Sung TY, Lee SC, Lee YS et al (2009) Robot-assisted endoscopic surgery for thyroid cancer: experience with the first 100 patients. Surg Endosc 23(11):2399–2406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0366-xCrossRefPubMed

37.

Lee J, Nah KY, Kim RM, Ahn YH, Soh EY, Chung WY (2010) Differences in postoperative outcomes, function, and cosmesis: open versus robotic thyroidectomy. Surg Endosc 24(12):3186–3194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1113-zCrossRefPubMed

38.

Qureshi YA, Mohammadi B (2018) Robotic oesophago-gastric cancer surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 100(6_sup):23–30. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.supp1.23CrossRef

39.

Singh R, Wang K, Qureshi MB, Rangel IC, Brown NJ, Shahrestani S et al (2022) Robotics in neurosurgery: Current prevalence and future directions. Surg Neurol Int 13:373. https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_522_2022CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Shah J, Vyas A, Vyas D (2014) The history of robotics in surgical specialties. Am J Robot Surg 1(1):12–20. https://doi.org/10.1166/ajrs.2014.1006CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, Favretti F (1999) The world’s first obesity surgery performed by a surgeon at a distance. Obes Surg 9(2):206–209. https://doi.org/10.1381/096089299765553539CrossRefPubMed

42.

Hanly EJ, Talamini MA (2004) Robotic abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 188(4A Suppl):19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.08.020CrossRef

43.

Coratti A, Annecchiarico M, Di Marino M, Gentile E, Coratti F, Giulianotti PC (2013) Robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: current status and technical considerations. World J Surg 37(12):2771–2781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2100-zCrossRefPubMed

44.

Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend C (2002) Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 16(9):1271–1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8523-5CrossRef

45.

Advincula AP, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds RK (2004) Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11(4):511–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60085-0CrossRefPubMed

46.

Barakat EE, Bedaiwy MA, Zimberg S, Nutter B, Nosseir M, Falcone T (2011) Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of surgical outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 117:256–265. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318207854fCrossRefPubMed

47.

Lonnerfors C, Persson J (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy; a feasible technique for removal of unfavorably localized myomas. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 88:994–999. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340903118026CrossRefPubMed

48.

Visco AG, Advincula AP (2008) Robotic gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol 112:1369–1384. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818f3c17CrossRefPubMed

49.

Ramavath KK, Murthy PS (2011) Robotic sacrocolpopexy: An observational experience at mayoclinic, USA. J Gynecol Endosc Surg 2:53–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1216.85285CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Akl MN, Long JB, Giles DL, Cornella JL, Pettit PD, Chen AH et al (2009) Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: Technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc 23:2390–2394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0311-4CrossRefPubMed

51.

Rodgers AK, Goldberg JM, Hammel JP, Falcone T (2007) Tubal anastomosis by robotic compared with outpatient minilaparotomy. Obstet Gynecol 109:1375–1380. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000264591.43544.0fCrossRefPubMed

52.

Göçmen A, Sanlýkan F (2013) Two live births following robotic-assisted abdominal cerclage in nonpregnant women. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol 2013:256972. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/256972CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Schimpf MO, Morgenstern JH, Tulikangas PK, Wagner JR (2007) Vesicovaginal fistula repair without intentional cystostomy using the laparoscopic robotic approach: a case report. JSLS 11:378–380PubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Pietersma CS, Schreuder HW, Kooistra A, Koops SE (2014) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic repair of a vesicovaginal fistula: A time-consuming novelty or an effective tool? BMJ Case Rep. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2014-204119CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Draaisma WA, Nieuwenhuis DH, Janssen LW, Broeders IA (2008) Robot-assisted laparoscopic rectovaginopexy for rectal prolapse: A prospective cohort study on feasibility and safety. J Robotic Surg 1:273–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-007-0053-7CrossRef

56.

Francis SL, Agrawal A, Azadi A, Ostergard DR, Deveneau NE (2015) Robotic Burch colposuspension: a surgical case and instructional video. Int Urogynecol J 26(1):147–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2471-1CrossRefPubMed

57.

Harky A, Hussain SMA (2019) Robotic cardiac surgery: the future gold standard or an unnecessary extravagance? Braz J Cardiovasc Surg 34(4):XII–XIII. https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2019-0194CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Onnasch JF, Schneider F, Falk V, Mierzwa M, Bucerius J, Mohr FW (2002) Five years of less invasive mitral valve surgery: from experimental to routine approach. Heart Surg Forum 5(2):132–135PubMed

59.

Cosgrove DM 3rd, Sabik JF, Navia JL (1998) Minimally invasive valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg 65(6):1535–1539. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-4975(98)00300-2CrossRefPubMed

60.

Navia JL, Cosgrove DM 3rd (1996) Minimally invasive mitral valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg 62(5):1542–1544. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(96)00779-5CrossRefPubMed

61.

Mihaljevic T, Jarrett CM, Gillinov AM, Williams SJ, DeVilliers PA, Stewart WJ et al (2011) Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve prolapse versus conventional approaches: potential realized. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 141(1):72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.09.008CrossRefPubMed

62.

Xiao C, Gao C, Yang M, Wang G, Wu Y, Wang J et al (2014) Totally robotic atrial septal defect closure: 7-year single institution experience and follow-up. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 19(6):933–937. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivu263CrossRefPubMed

63.

Li S, Gao Ch (2017) Surgical Experience of Primary Cardiac Tumor: Single-Institution 23-Year Report. Med Sci Monit 23:2111–2117. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.903324CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Amraoui S, Labrousse L, Sohal M, Jansens JL, Berte B, Derval N et al (2017) Alternative to left ventricular lead implantation through the coronary sinus: 1-year experience with a minimally invasive and robotically guided approach. Europace 19(1):88–95. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euv430CrossRefPubMed

65.

Digioia AM (2002) Comparison of a mechanical acetabular alignment guide with computer placement of the socket. J Arthroplasty 17(3):359–364. https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2002.30411CrossRefPubMed

66.

Khlopas A, Chughtai M, Hampp EL, Scholl LY, Prieto M, Chang TC et al (2017) Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty demonstrated soft tissue protection. Surg Technol Int 30:441–446PubMed

67.

Solomiichuk V, Fleischhammer J, Molliqaj G, Warda J, Alaid A, von Eckardstein K et al (2017) Robotic vs fluoroscopy-guided pedicle screw insertion for metastatic spinal disease: a matched-cohort comparison. Neurosurg Focus 42(5):E13. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS1710CrossRefPubMed

68.

Schröder ML, Staartjes VE (2017) Revisions for screw malposition and clinical outcomes after robot-guided lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus 42(5):E12. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS16534CrossRefPubMed

69.

Bozkurt M, Apaydin N, Işik C, Bilgetekin YG, Acar HI, Elhan A (2011) Robotic arthroscopic surgery: a new challenge in arthroscopic surgery Part-I: robotic shoulder arthroscopy; a cadaveric feasibility study. Int J Med Robot 7(4):496–500. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.436CrossRefPubMed

70.

Dagnino G, Georgilas I, Kohler P, Morad S, Atkins R, Dogramadzi S (2016) Navigation system for robot-assisted intraarticular lower-limb fracture surgery. Int J CARS 11:1831–1843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-016-1418-zCrossRef

71.

Oszwald M, Westphal R, Klepzig D, Khalafi A, Gaulke R, Müller CW et al (2010) Robotized access to the medullary cavity for intramedullary nailing of the femur. Technol Health Care 18(3):173–180. https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-2010-0580CrossRefPubMed

72.

Lei H, Sheng L, Manyi W, Junqiang W, Wenyong L (2010) A biplanar robot navigation system for the distal locking of intramedullary nails. Int J Med Robot 6(1):61–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.289CrossRefPubMed

73.

Mantovani G, Liverneaux P, Garcia JC Jr, Berner SH, Bednar MS, Mohr CJ (2011) Endoscopic exploration and repair of brachial plexus with telerobotic manipulation: a cadaver trial. J Neurosurg 115(3):659–664. https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.3.JNS10931CrossRefPubMed

74.

Garcia JC Jr, Lebailly F, Mantovani G, Mendonca LA, Garcia J, Liverneaux P (2012) Telerobotic manipulation of the brachial plexus. J Reconstr Microsurg 28(7):491–494. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1313761CrossRefPubMed

75.

Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Kowalczyk KJ, Hu JC (2012) Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol 187(4):1392–1398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.11.089CrossRefPubMed

76.

Rassweiler J, Rassweiler MC, Kenngott H, Frede T, Michel MS, Alken P et al (2013) The past, present and future of minimally invasive therapy in urology: a review and speculative outlook. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 22(4):200–209. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645706.2013.816323CrossRefPubMed

77.

Uberoi J, Disick GI, Munver R (2009) Minimally invasive surgical management of pelvic-ureteric junction obstruction: update on the current status of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty. BJU Int 104(11):1722–1729. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08682.xCrossRefPubMed

78.

Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Shoma AM, El-Tabey NA et al (2003) Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int 92(3):232–236. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04329.xCrossRefPubMed

79.

Parekattil SK, Moran ME (2010) Robotic instrumentation: evolution and microsurgical applications. Indian Journal of Urology 26(3):395–403. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.70580CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

80.

Kowalewski KF, Seifert L, Ali S, Schmidt MW, Seide S, Haney C et al (2021) Functional outcomes after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted rectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 35(1):81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07361-1CrossRefPubMed

81.

Bongiolatti S, Farronato A, Di Marino M, Annecchiarico M, Coratti F, Cianchi F et al (2020) Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: systematic review on surgical and oncological outcomes. Mini-invasive Surg 4:41. https://doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2020.28CrossRef

82.

Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, Lopez A, Vieira M, Ribeiro R et al (2018) Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 379(20):1895–1904. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1806395CrossRefPubMed

83.

Audenet F, Sfakianos JP (2017) Evidence of atypical recurrences after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a comprehensive review of the literature. Bladder Cancer 3(4):231–236. https://doi.org/10.3233/BLC-170127CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

84.

O’Sullivan KE, Kreaden US, Hebert AE, Eaton D, Redmond KC (2019) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approaches for lobectomy. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 28(4):526–534. https://doi.org/10.21037/acs.2019.02.04CrossRefPubMed

85.

Vijayakumar M, Shetty R (2020) Robotic surgery in oncology. Indian J Surg Oncol 11(4):549–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-020-01251-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

86.

Fernandez N, Farhat WA (2019) A comprehensive analysis of robot-assisted surgery uptake in the pediatric surgical discipline. Front Surg 6:9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2019.00009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

87.

Ballouhey Q, Villemagne T, Cros J, Vacquerie V, Berenguer D, Braik K et al (2015) Assessment of paediatric thoracic robotic surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 20(3):300–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivu406CrossRefPubMed

88.

Mei H, Tang S (2023) Robotic-assisted surgery in the pediatric surgeons’ world: current situation and future prospectives. Front Pediatr 11:1120831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2023.1120831CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

89.

Pandey SK, Sharma V (2019) Robotics and ophthalmology: are we there yet? Indian J Ophthalmol 67(7):988–994. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1131_18CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

90.

Channa R, Iordachita I, Handa JT (2017) Robotic vitreoretinal surgery. Retina 37(7):1220–1228. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000001398CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

91.

Bourges JL, Hubschman JP, Burt B, Culjat M, Schwartz SD (2009) Robotic microsurgery: corneal transplantation. Br J Ophthalmol 93(12):1672–1675. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2009CrossRefPubMed

92.

Mitchell B, Koo J, Iordachita I, Kazanzides P, Kapoor A, Handa J, et al (2007) Development and application of a new steady-hand manipulator for retinal surgery. Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on robotics and automation, pp 623–629

93.

Taylor RH, Menciassi A, Fichtinger G, Fiorini P, Dario P (2016) Medical robotics and computer-integrated surgery. In: Springer handbook of robotics. Springer International Publishing, pp 1657–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1_63.

94.

Deo N, Anjankar A (2023) Artificial intelligence with robotics in healthcare: a narrative review of its viability in India. Cureus 15(5):e39416. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39416CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

95.

Camarillo DB, Krummel TM, Salisbury JK (2004) Robotic technology in surgery: past, present, and future. Am J Surg 188(4):2–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.08.025CrossRef

96.

Kaur S (2012) How medical robots are going to affect our lives. IETE Tech Rev 29(3):184–187CrossRef

97.

Garcia P, Rosen J, Kapoor C et al (2009) Trauma pod: a semi-automated telerobotic surgical system. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 5(2):136–146CrossRef

98.

Pandav K, Te AG, Tomer N, Nair SS, Tewari AK (2022) Leveraging 5G technology for robotic surgery and cancer care. Cancer Rep (Hoboken) 5(8):e1595. https://doi.org/10.1002/cnr2.1595CrossRefPubMed

99.

Bergholz R, Botden S, Verweij J, Tytgat S, Van Gemert W, Boettcher M et al (2020) Evaluation of a new robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical system for procedures in small cavities. J Robot Surg 14(1):191–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-00961-yCrossRefPubMed

100.

Tan Wen Sheng B, Wong P, Teo Ee Hoon C (2018) Transoral robotic excision of laryngeal papillomas with flex(R) robotic system—a novel surgical approach. Am J Otolaryngol 39(3):355–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2018.03.011CrossRefPubMed

101.

Peters BS, Armijo PR, Krause C, Choudhury SA, Oleynikov D (2018) Review of emerging surgical robotic technology. Surg Endosc 32(4):1636–1655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6079-2CrossRefPubMed

102.

Sheth KR, Koh CJ (2019) The future of robotic surgery in pediatric urology: upcoming technology and evolution within the field. Front Pediatr 7:259. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2019.00259CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Advancements in robotic surgery: innovations, challenges and future prospects
verfasst von: Swastika Chatterjee
Soumyajit Das
Karabi Ganguly
Dibyendu Mandal
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2024
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: Journal of Robotic Surgery / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01801-w

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Häusliche Gewalt Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

21.05.2024 TAVI Nachrichten

Bei schwerer Aortenstenose und obstruktiver KHK empfehlen die Leitlinien derzeit eine chirurgische Kombi-Behandlung aus Klappenersatz plus Bypass-OP. Diese Empfehlung wird allerdings jetzt durch eine aktuelle Studie infrage gestellt – mit überraschender Deutlichkeit.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Advancements in robotic surgery: innovations, challenges and future prospects

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

Update Chirurgie

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2024

Transferability of the robot assisted and laparoscopic suturing learning curves

Preceptorship in robotic colorectal surgery: experience from the Australian private sector

Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: single-center, retrospective, propensity score analyses

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

Oncological outcomes post transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, a single-centre retrospective Australian study

Comment on: “Body mass index influence on short-term perioperative results in robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis”

Update Chirurgie