Davor Stamenovic, P. Schiller, I. Karampinis, C. Galata, E. D. Roessner
{"title":"Uniportal robotic assisted surgery for anatomical lung resection—First German experience","authors":"Davor Stamenovic, P. Schiller, I. Karampinis, C. Galata, E. D. Roessner","doi":"10.1002/rcs.2580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (uRATS) has emerged as a promising technique with potential advantages over multiportal approaches. This study aims to evaluate our initial outcomes of uRATS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Five patients underwent anatomic lung resections with systematic nodal dissection through a uniportal robotic approach by one surgeon. The results were compared to the results of the first five uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (uVATS) anatomical resections performed by the same surgeon.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>No adverse events occurred during the uRATS-procedures. Comparable surgical outcomes were observed between uRATS and uVATS, including hospital stays, complication rates, and blood loss. The average procedural time was slightly but non-significantly longer in the uRATS-group. Average pain-scores were lower in the uRATS group. One patient in each group experienced major postoperative complications, with one case of in-hospital mortality in the uRATS-group.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The outcomes of uRATS/uVATS were comparable, highlighting the potential and the feasibility of this technique. Prospective studies comparing the learning curves, complication rate and hospital-stay are required in order to justify the superiority of robotics over uVATS.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50311,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/rcs.2580","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rcs.2580","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (uRATS) has emerged as a promising technique with potential advantages over multiportal approaches. This study aims to evaluate our initial outcomes of uRATS.
Material and Methods
Five patients underwent anatomic lung resections with systematic nodal dissection through a uniportal robotic approach by one surgeon. The results were compared to the results of the first five uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (uVATS) anatomical resections performed by the same surgeon.
Results
No adverse events occurred during the uRATS-procedures. Comparable surgical outcomes were observed between uRATS and uVATS, including hospital stays, complication rates, and blood loss. The average procedural time was slightly but non-significantly longer in the uRATS-group. Average pain-scores were lower in the uRATS group. One patient in each group experienced major postoperative complications, with one case of in-hospital mortality in the uRATS-group.
Conclusion
The outcomes of uRATS/uVATS were comparable, highlighting the potential and the feasibility of this technique. Prospective studies comparing the learning curves, complication rate and hospital-stay are required in order to justify the superiority of robotics over uVATS.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery provides a cross-disciplinary platform for presenting the latest developments in robotics and computer assisted technologies for medical applications. The journal publishes cutting-edge papers and expert reviews, complemented by commentaries, correspondence and conference highlights that stimulate discussion and exchange of ideas. Areas of interest include robotic surgery aids and systems, operative planning tools, medical imaging and visualisation, simulation and navigation, virtual reality, intuitive command and control systems, haptics and sensor technologies. In addition to research and surgical planning studies, the journal welcomes papers detailing clinical trials and applications of computer-assisted workflows and robotic systems in neurosurgery, urology, paediatric, orthopaedic, craniofacial, cardiovascular, thoraco-abdominal, musculoskeletal and visceral surgery. Articles providing critical analysis of clinical trials, assessment of the benefits and risks of the application of these technologies, commenting on ease of use, or addressing surgical education and training issues are also encouraged. The journal aims to foster a community that encompasses medical practitioners, researchers, and engineers and computer scientists developing robotic systems and computational tools in academic and commercial environments, with the intention of promoting and developing these exciting areas of medical technology.