Evolution of robotic nephrectomy for living donation: from hand-assisted to totally robotic technique.

Alessandro Giacomoni, Stefano Di Sandro, Andrea Lauterio, Giacomo Concone, Iacopo Mangoni, Plamen Mihaylov, Matteo Tripepi, Luciano De Carlis
{"title":"Evolution of robotic nephrectomy for living donation: from hand-assisted to totally robotic technique.","authors":"Alessandro Giacomoni,&nbsp;Stefano Di Sandro,&nbsp;Andrea Lauterio,&nbsp;Giacomo Concone,&nbsp;Iacopo Mangoni,&nbsp;Plamen Mihaylov,&nbsp;Matteo Tripepi,&nbsp;Luciano De Carlis","doi":"10.1002/rcs.1576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The application of robotic-assisted surgery offers EndoWrist instruments and 3-D visualization of the operative field, which are improvements over traditional laparoscopy. The results of the few studies published so far have shown that living donor nephrectomy using the robot-assisted technique is safe, feasible, and offers advantages to patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Since November 2009, 16 patients have undergone robotic-assisted living donor nephrectomy at our Institute. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique adopted for the procedure: Group A, hand-assisted robotic nephrectomy (eight patients); Group B, totally robotic nephrectomy (eight patients).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intra-operative bleeding was similar in the two groups (90 vs 100 mL for Group A and B, respectively). Median warm ischemia time was significantly shorter in Group A (2.3 vs 5.1 min for Group A and B, respectively, P-value = 0.05). Switching to the open procedure was never required. Median operative time was not significantly longer in Group A than Group B (275 min vs 250 min, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robotic assisted living kidney recovery is a safe and effective procedure. Considering the overall technical, clinical, and feasibility aspects of living kidney donation, we believe that the robotic assisted technique is the method of choice for surgeon's comfort and donors' safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":75029,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS","volume":" ","pages":"286-93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/rcs.1576","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Background: The application of robotic-assisted surgery offers EndoWrist instruments and 3-D visualization of the operative field, which are improvements over traditional laparoscopy. The results of the few studies published so far have shown that living donor nephrectomy using the robot-assisted technique is safe, feasible, and offers advantages to patients.

Materials and methods: Since November 2009, 16 patients have undergone robotic-assisted living donor nephrectomy at our Institute. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique adopted for the procedure: Group A, hand-assisted robotic nephrectomy (eight patients); Group B, totally robotic nephrectomy (eight patients).

Results: Intra-operative bleeding was similar in the two groups (90 vs 100 mL for Group A and B, respectively). Median warm ischemia time was significantly shorter in Group A (2.3 vs 5.1 min for Group A and B, respectively, P-value = 0.05). Switching to the open procedure was never required. Median operative time was not significantly longer in Group A than Group B (275 min vs 250 min, respectively).

Conclusion: Robotic assisted living kidney recovery is a safe and effective procedure. Considering the overall technical, clinical, and feasibility aspects of living kidney donation, we believe that the robotic assisted technique is the method of choice for surgeon's comfort and donors' safety.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
活体捐献机器人肾切除术的发展:从手辅助到完全机器人技术。
背景:机器人辅助手术的应用提供了EndoWrist器械和手术视野的三维可视化,这是传统腹腔镜手术的改进。迄今为止发表的少数研究结果表明,使用机器人辅助技术进行活体供体肾切除术是安全、可行的,并为患者提供了优势。材料与方法:自2009年11月以来,我院共收治了16例机器人辅助活体肾切除术患者。根据手术技术将患者分为两组:A组,手辅助机器人肾切除术(8例);B组:全机器人肾切除术(8例)。结果:两组术中出血相似(A组90 mL, B组100 mL)。A组的中位热缺血时间明显缩短(分别为2.3 min和5.1 min, p值= 0.05)。从未要求切换到开放式程序。A组的中位手术时间不明显长于B组(分别为275 min和250 min)。结论:机器人辅助活体肾脏康复是一种安全、有效的手术方法。考虑到活体肾脏捐献的整体技术、临床和可行性方面,我们认为机器人辅助技术是外科医生舒适和捐赠者安全的首选方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Dual-Mode Robot-Assisted Plate Implantation Method for Femoral Shaft Fracture. Automated Non-Supervised Eye Disorder Screening System Using Virtual Reality. Comparison of robotic and open central pancreatectomy. Full coverage path planning algorithm for MRgFUS therapy A deep learning framework for real‐time 3D model registration in robot‐assisted laparoscopic surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1