Does robotic assistance improve efficiency in performing complex minimally invasive surgical procedures?

ObjectiveWe used a model of biliary-enteric anastomosis to test whether da Vinci robotics improves performance on a complex minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedure.MethodsAn ex vivo model for choledochojejunostomy was created using porcine livers with extrahepatic bile ducts and contiguous intestines. MIS choledochojejunostomies were performed in two arms: group 1 (laparoscopic, n = 30) and group 2 (da Vinci assisted, n = 30). Procedures were performed by three surgeons with graduated MIS expertise: surgeon A (MIS + robotics), surgeon B (experienced MIS), and surgeon C (basic MIS). Each surgeon performed ten procedures per group. The primary objective was time to complete anastomoses using each method. Secondary objectives included anastomosis quality, impact of experience on performance, and learning curve.Resultsda Vinci led to faster anastomoses than laparoscopy (28.0 vs. 35.9 min, p = 0.002). Surgeon A’s mean operative times were equivalent with both techniques (24.5 vs. 22.3 min). Surgeons B and C experienced faster operative times with robotics over laparoscopy alone (39.4 vs. 28.6 min, p = 0.01; and 43.8 vs. 33.0 min, p = 0.008, respectively). Surgeon A did not demonstrate a learning curve with either laparoscopy (22.4 vs. 22.4 min, p = not significant, NS) or robotics (24.7 vs. 19.8 min, p = NS). Surgeon B demonstrated nonsignificant improvement with laparoscopy (46.6 vs. 39.5 min, p = NS). With robotic assistance, a learning curve was demonstrated (36.8 vs. 24.7 min, p = 0.02). Surgeon C demonstrated a learning curve with laparoscopy (58.3 vs. 33.2 min, p = 0.004), but no improvement was noted with robot assistance (32.2 vs. 34.7 min, p = NS).Conclusionsda Vinci improves time to completion and quality of choledochojejunostomy over laparoscopy in an ex vivo bench model. This advantage is more pronounced in the hands of surgeons with less MIS experience. Conversely, robotics may allow less experienced surgeons to perform more complex operations without first developing advanced laparoscopic skills; however, there may be benefit to first obtaining fundamental skills.

[1]  A. Sandler,et al.  The robotic approach to complex hepatobiliary anomalies in children: preliminary report. , 2007, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[2]  M. Röthlin,et al.  Laparoscopic gastro- and hepaticojejunostomy for palliation of pancreatic cancer , 1999, Surgical Endoscopy.

[3]  K A Zucker,et al.  Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y choledochojejunostomy. , 1997, American journal of surgery.

[4]  C. Schlachta,et al.  Robot-assisted minimally invasive common bile duct exploration: a Canadian first. , 2008, Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie.

[5]  R. Ghavamian,et al.  Minimally invasive approaches to prostate cancer: a review of the current literature. , 2007, Urology journal.

[6]  I. B. Borel Rinkes,et al.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic choledochojejunostomy , 2003, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[7]  Ashutosh Tewari,et al.  Robotic prostatectomy: a pooled analysis of published literature , 2006, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[8]  James A. Young,et al.  Robotic Surgical Training in an Academic Institution , 2001, Annals of surgery.

[9]  I. Broeders,et al.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic intestinal anastomosis , 2003, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[10]  S. Eubanks,et al.  Laparoscopic biliary and enteric bypass. , 1999, Seminars in surgical oncology.

[11]  Anurag Maheshwari,et al.  Biliary complications and outcomes of liver transplantation from donors after cardiac death , 2007, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[12]  M. Franklin,et al.  Laparoscopic Choledochoduodenostomy: Review of a 4-Year Experience With an Uncommon Problem , 2002, Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques.

[13]  T. Welling,et al.  Biliary complications following liver transplantation in the model for end‐stage liver disease era: Effect of donor, recipient, and technical factors , 2008, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[14]  Steven D. Wexner,et al.  The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[15]  P. Nyckowski,et al.  Biliary complications in relation to the technique of biliary reconstruction in adult liver transplant recipients. , 2007, Transplantation proceedings.

[16]  A Kashfi,et al.  Robot‐assisted abdominal surgery , 2004, The British journal of surgery.

[17]  G. Caravaglios,et al.  Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. , 2003, Archives of surgery.