Bridging the gap: feasibility and future directions of robotic surgery in Sub-Saharan Africa-a narrative review.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Fitsum A Gemechu, Helina K Teklehaimanot, Michael A Negussie, Biruk T Mengistie, Chernet T Mengistie, Mikiyas G Teferi, Liya T Tena, Rodolfo J Oviedo
{"title":"Bridging the gap: feasibility and future directions of robotic surgery in Sub-Saharan Africa-a narrative review.","authors":"Fitsum A Gemechu, Helina K Teklehaimanot, Michael A Negussie, Biruk T Mengistie, Chernet T Mengistie, Mikiyas G Teferi, Liya T Tena, Rodolfo J Oviedo","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02860-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robotic surgery (RS) is expanding globally but remains nascent in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Given constrained resources, training gaps, and infrastructure limitations, the feasibility and health-system value of RS in SSA require careful appraisal relative to open and laparoscopic surgery. We conducted a narrative review of RS feasibility, adoption, training, outcomes, and economics with a primary focus on SSA. Sources included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and gray literature from January 2010 to May 2025. Evidence was synthesized across themes (infrastructure, workforce, financing, outcomes, and implementation models), incorporating African data where available and using global studies for context. Adoption in SSA is concentrated in a few private centers in South Africa, with Egypt providing continental historical context and Rwanda emerging as a regional training hub. Dominant barriers include high capital and recurrent costs, supply-chain and maintenance needs, reliable power and connectivity requirements, and limited team-based training capacity. While global data consistently show advantages of RS over open surgery (e.g., reduced blood loss, complications, and length of stay), Africa-specific comparative data versus laparoscopy are limited and generally demonstrate longer operative times and greater blood loss without significant differences in conversion, length of stay, or overall morbidity. Promising pathways include centralized high-volume hubs, public-private and NGO partnerships with explicit maintenance and uptime guarantees, regional training pipelines (on-site simulation, fellowships, and telementoring/telesurgery), and staged financing models (shared ownership, refurbishment, and outcome-linked contracts). Emerging, potentially lower-cost platforms may improve affordability, but sustainable case volume and workforce development remain prerequisites. We propose pragmatic metrics to track implementation: procedural volume and mix, system uptime, conversion and complication rates, cost per case, and training outputs. RS is feasible in carefully selected SSA centers when aligned with health-system priorities, robust maintenance, and concentrated training. Given equipoise versus laparoscopy in current African data, early programs should be justified by access, training, and service-delivery goals rather than presumed clinical superiority. Prospective registries, context-specific economic evaluations, and procedure-specific comparative studies are needed to guide equitable and sustainable scale-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"708"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02860-x","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

Robotic surgery (RS) is expanding globally but remains nascent in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Given constrained resources, training gaps, and infrastructure limitations, the feasibility and health-system value of RS in SSA require careful appraisal relative to open and laparoscopic surgery. We conducted a narrative review of RS feasibility, adoption, training, outcomes, and economics with a primary focus on SSA. Sources included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and gray literature from January 2010 to May 2025. Evidence was synthesized across themes (infrastructure, workforce, financing, outcomes, and implementation models), incorporating African data where available and using global studies for context. Adoption in SSA is concentrated in a few private centers in South Africa, with Egypt providing continental historical context and Rwanda emerging as a regional training hub. Dominant barriers include high capital and recurrent costs, supply-chain and maintenance needs, reliable power and connectivity requirements, and limited team-based training capacity. While global data consistently show advantages of RS over open surgery (e.g., reduced blood loss, complications, and length of stay), Africa-specific comparative data versus laparoscopy are limited and generally demonstrate longer operative times and greater blood loss without significant differences in conversion, length of stay, or overall morbidity. Promising pathways include centralized high-volume hubs, public-private and NGO partnerships with explicit maintenance and uptime guarantees, regional training pipelines (on-site simulation, fellowships, and telementoring/telesurgery), and staged financing models (shared ownership, refurbishment, and outcome-linked contracts). Emerging, potentially lower-cost platforms may improve affordability, but sustainable case volume and workforce development remain prerequisites. We propose pragmatic metrics to track implementation: procedural volume and mix, system uptime, conversion and complication rates, cost per case, and training outputs. RS is feasible in carefully selected SSA centers when aligned with health-system priorities, robust maintenance, and concentrated training. Given equipoise versus laparoscopy in current African data, early programs should be justified by access, training, and service-delivery goals rather than presumed clinical superiority. Prospective registries, context-specific economic evaluations, and procedure-specific comparative studies are needed to guide equitable and sustainable scale-up.

弥合差距:撒哈拉以南非洲机器人手术的可行性和未来方向-叙述性回顾。
机器人手术(RS)正在全球扩张,但在撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA)仍处于起步阶段。鉴于有限的资源、培训差距和基础设施的限制,相对于开放和腹腔镜手术,需要仔细评估SSA RS的可行性和卫生系统价值。我们对RS的可行性、采用、培训、结果和经济性进行了叙述性回顾,主要关注SSA。资料来源包括PubMed, Embase, Scopus,谷歌Scholar和2010年1月至2025年5月的灰色文献。综合各主题(基础设施、劳动力、融资、成果和实施模式)的证据,在可获得的情况下纳入非洲数据,并利用全球研究作为背景。非洲南部地区的培训主要集中在南非的几个私人中心,埃及提供了非洲大陆的历史背景,卢旺达正在成为地区培训中心。主要障碍包括高资本和经常性成本、供应链和维护需求、可靠的电力和连接要求以及有限的团队培训能力。虽然全球数据一致显示RS优于开放手术(例如,减少出血量、并发症和住院时间),但非洲特定的比较数据与腹腔镜相比有限,通常显示手术时间更长,出血量更大,但在转诊、住院时间或总体发病率方面没有显着差异。有希望的途径包括集中的大容量中心、明确维护和正常运行时间保证的公私和非政府组织合作伙伴关系、区域培训渠道(现场模拟、奖学金和远程监控/远程手术)和分阶段融资模式(共享所有权、翻新和与结果相关的合同)。新兴的、潜在的低成本平台可能会提高人们的负担能力,但可持续的病例量和劳动力发展仍然是先决条件。我们提出实用的指标来跟踪实施情况:程序数量和组合、系统正常运行时间、转换和复杂性、每例成本和培训产出。在精心挑选的SSA中心,如果与卫生系统的重点、强有力的维护和集中的培训相一致,RS是可行的。鉴于目前非洲数据与腹腔镜手术的平衡,早期项目应该通过获取、培训和服务提供目标而不是假定的临床优势来证明。需要前瞻性登记、针对具体情况的经济评价和针对具体程序的比较研究来指导公平和可持续的扩大规模。
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信