A Systematic Review of Robot-assisted vs Manual Vitreoretinal Surgery: Is it Feasible?

Q4 Health Professions
Anak Agung Fridami Dewi, Jovita Jutamulia, Dewa Ayu Anggi Paramitha
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Robot-assisted vs Manual Vitreoretinal Surgery: Is it Feasible?","authors":"Anak Agung Fridami Dewi, Jovita Jutamulia, Dewa Ayu Anggi Paramitha","doi":"10.52403/ijrr.20231001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and Objectives: Vitreoretinal surgery requires high precision and fine manipulation of instruments, which can be challenging due to human physiological barriers such as tremors, jerks, and low-frequency drifts. Robotic assistance carries the potential to overcome these limitations by providing better stability and filtering involuntary movements, therefore improving safety and future opportunities for this complex procedure. This review aims to compare the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted and manual vitreoretinal surgery. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed on 4 online databases: PubMed, Cochrane, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and hand searching. Human studies comparing robot-assisted and manual vitreoretinal surgery, English language, and full-text journal available were included in this review. We identified the feasibility, safety, and duration of the robot-assisted approach for vitreoretinal surgery as the main outcome measurements. Results: Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 45 adults were evaluated. Robotic assistance was performed on various different vitreoretinal surgery procedures, including subretinal injection of tissue plasminogen activator (TPA), peeling of epiretinal membrane (ERM), and internal limiting membrane (ILM), with one study performed both procedures. All three studies showed surgical steps carried out with robotic assistance were successfully performed without clinical complications observed. The duration was longer in robot-assisted surgery compared to manual surgery. The number of retinal microtrauma was less frequent in robot-assisted surgery compared to manual surgery. Conclusion: Even though the duration of surgery took longer in the robot-assisted group, all studies show the feasibility and safety of robotic assistance in vitreoretinal surgery. However, further studies with larger samples are needed. Keywords:robot-assisted surgery, manual surgery, vitreoretinal surgery .","PeriodicalId":13809,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Current Research and Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Current Research and Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20231001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: Vitreoretinal surgery requires high precision and fine manipulation of instruments, which can be challenging due to human physiological barriers such as tremors, jerks, and low-frequency drifts. Robotic assistance carries the potential to overcome these limitations by providing better stability and filtering involuntary movements, therefore improving safety and future opportunities for this complex procedure. This review aims to compare the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted and manual vitreoretinal surgery. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed on 4 online databases: PubMed, Cochrane, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and hand searching. Human studies comparing robot-assisted and manual vitreoretinal surgery, English language, and full-text journal available were included in this review. We identified the feasibility, safety, and duration of the robot-assisted approach for vitreoretinal surgery as the main outcome measurements. Results: Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 45 adults were evaluated. Robotic assistance was performed on various different vitreoretinal surgery procedures, including subretinal injection of tissue plasminogen activator (TPA), peeling of epiretinal membrane (ERM), and internal limiting membrane (ILM), with one study performed both procedures. All three studies showed surgical steps carried out with robotic assistance were successfully performed without clinical complications observed. The duration was longer in robot-assisted surgery compared to manual surgery. The number of retinal microtrauma was less frequent in robot-assisted surgery compared to manual surgery. Conclusion: Even though the duration of surgery took longer in the robot-assisted group, all studies show the feasibility and safety of robotic assistance in vitreoretinal surgery. However, further studies with larger samples are needed. Keywords:robot-assisted surgery, manual surgery, vitreoretinal surgery .
机器人辅助与人工玻璃体视网膜手术的系统评价:是否可行?
介绍和目的:玻璃体视网膜手术需要高精度和精细的器械操作,由于人体的生理障碍,如震颤、抽搐和低频漂移,这可能具有挑战性。通过提供更好的稳定性和过滤无意识运动,机器人辅助具有克服这些限制的潜力,从而提高了这一复杂过程的安全性和未来的机会。本综述旨在比较机器人辅助和人工玻璃体视网膜手术的可行性和安全性。方法:在PubMed、Cochrane、ProQuest、ScienceDirect和hand search 4个在线数据库中进行全面的文献检索。比较机器人辅助和人工玻璃体视网膜手术的人类研究、英语语言和可用的全文期刊都包括在本综述中。我们确定了玻璃体视网膜手术中机器人辅助入路的可行性、安全性和持续时间作为主要的结果测量。结果:3项随机对照试验(RCTs)共纳入45名成人。机器人辅助进行了各种不同的玻璃体视网膜手术,包括视网膜下注射组织纤溶酶原激活剂(TPA),视网膜前膜(ERM)剥离和内限制膜(ILM),其中一项研究进行了两种手术。所有三项研究都表明,在机器人辅助下进行的手术步骤成功完成,没有观察到临床并发症。与人工手术相比,机器人辅助手术的持续时间更长。与人工手术相比,机器人辅助手术中视网膜微损伤的发生率较低。结论:尽管机器人辅助组的手术时间更长,但所有研究都表明机器人辅助在玻璃体视网膜手术中的可行性和安全性。然而,需要更大样本的进一步研究。关键词:机器人辅助手术,人工手术,玻璃体视网膜手术。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Current Research and Review
International Journal of Current Research and Review Health Professions-Health Professions (miscellaneous)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
162
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信