Journal of Robotic Surgery最新文献

{"title":"Dual robotic surgery: Da Vinci SP^® and Levita^® MARS (magnetic-assisted robotic surgery) platforms.","authors":"Ashley N Gonzalez, Benjamin M Eilender, Jeffrey A Cadeddu","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02231-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11701-025-02231-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The applications of robotics in urology has been rapidly expanding since the introduction of the Da Vinci robotic platform in 2000. In recent years, there have been further developments in the robotic surgery space including advancements in Da Vinci's own robotic platform, the introduction of a single-port (SP^®) system, as well as new competitors and adjacent technology that has come to the market. One such technology is the magnetic-assisted robotic surgery (MARS^™) from Levita (Mountain View, CA). This system consists of a detachable magnetic grasper that can be placed within the body by a specialized laparoscopic instrument and manipulated from outside the body with an external magnet on a robotic arm that is surgeon controlled. Herein we describe the first dual robotic surgery employing MARS^™ during an SP^® transperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), demonstrating its feasibility and potential applications for use in single-port surgery in particular.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"70"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143411253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparative short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted vs video-assisted thoracic surgery in lung cancer: a multicenter retrospective study from EPITHOR with a quality audit.","authors":"Benjamin Bottet, André Gillibert, Agathe Seguin-Givelet, Pierre-Emmanuel Falcoz, Pierre-Benoit Pagès, Edouard Sage, Marion Durand, Hadrien Marechal, Frankie Mbadinga, Xavier Benoit D'Journo, Jean-Marc Baste","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02174-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11701-024-02174-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Advancements in diagnostic imaging and surgical techniques have significantly evolved the treatment landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The shift toward parenchymal-sparing approaches, such as segmentectomy for cT1a-bN0 tumors, is challenging the traditional lobectomy. This retrospective multicenter cohort study evaluates short-term outcomes of Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS) and Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) in NSCLC patients using data from the French EPITHOR registry, enhanced by an in-depth quality audit. The audit ensured the completeness and accuracy of the data by monitoring and improving the quality of data entry at participating centers. We included patients who underwent mini-invasive lobectomy or segmentectomy between January 2016 and December 2020. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay (LOS), with secondary outcomes including complications, 90-day rehospitalization, and mortality. A total of 5687 interventions were analyzed, including 3692 VATS and 1995 RATS procedures. The unadjusted mean LOS was slightly shorter for RATS (7.61 days) compared to VATS (8.04 days), though this difference was not statistically significant after adjustment (p = 0.073). No significant differences were found in secondary outcomes, including complication rates and 90-day mortality. The integration of a comprehensive quality audit allowed for a robust comparison of outcomes, ensuring reliable and accurate data across all centers. While RATS showed a trend toward shorter hospital stays, this study did not find statistically significant differences in short-term outcomes between RATS and VATS after adjusting for confounders. Both RATS and VATS are viable options for lung resections, with the choice potentially guided by surgeon expertise and institutional resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"68"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11821753/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143411181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Current status and prospects of robotic surgery adoption in obstetrics and gynecology: insights from a nationwide survey.","authors":"Misa Hayasaka, Mihoko Dofutsu, Takuma Yoshimura, Ayako Taima, Hiroaki Komatsu, Hiroaki Kobayashi","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02197-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02197-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to elucidate the current status, disparities, and challenges in adopting gynecological robotic surgery in Japan. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 17,444 members of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology between September and November 2023. The questionnaire assessed the demographics, robotic surgery implementation, and attitudes toward robotic surgery. Of the 1443 respondents (8.3% response rate), 46.0% worked in facilities without robotic systems. A total of 69.8% supported further promotion of robotic surgery, with younger generations showing greater interest. Healthcare economics was identified as the primary barrier (94.1%). Perceptions of benefits varied between malignant (75.4%) and benign (53.1%) conditions. Only 33.2% of participants endorsed robotic surgery training during residency. Regional differences were observed in attitudes towards educational benefits. Additionally, responses differed based on the number of laparoscopic surgeries performed and prior robotic surgery experience. This study revealed the significant challenges in accessing robotic surgery and limitations in insurance coverage. Disparities in the awareness of the benefits and conflicts of laparoscopic surgery were identified. The upcoming merger of the robotic and endoscopic surgery societies may drive further adoption. Comprehensive educational programs and awareness campaigns are vital for improving access and understanding among obstetricians and gynecologists in Japan.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143400416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction: Comparison of postoperative pain in robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Ya-Chu Wu, Mun-Kung Hong, Dah-Ching Ding","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02213-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02213-8","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"66"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143392234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparing the effect of laparoscopic and robotic stapling on clinical outcomes, efficiency, and costs of robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.","authors":"Juliane O Hafermann, Jarrod D Phelps, Mahmoud F El Tayash","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02223-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11701-025-02223-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a commonly used surgery to successfully and durably treat obesity that is increasingly performed robotically. The anastomoses created during robot-assisted RYGB are usually stapled, either using laparoscopic or robotic staplers. This study aimed to compare the peri-operative efficiency, costs, and clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic staplers in robot-assisted RYGB. This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent robot-assisted RYGB (with or without hiatal hernia repair) with the Da Vinci Xi robotic system in a private practice in the United States. The gastric pouch and anastomoses were created either with robotic SureForm™ staplers or laparoscopic Endo GIA™ staplers; enterotomies and incisions were closed with sutures. The primary outcome was procedure time. The secondary outcomes were instrument exchanges and reloads used, stapling costs, length of stay, and complications within 3 months. Of the 105 patients included, 50 patients were treated with robotic staplers and 55 with laparoscopic staplers. None were lost to follow-up. Laparoscopic staplers were more efficient than robotic ones: they significantly reduced procedure times across all analyzed categories as well as the number of instrument exchanges and reloads needed per surgery. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay, and no complications were reported. The higher number of reloads and the higher unit cost resulted in higher total stapling costs for robotic compared to laparoscopic staplers. While robotic staplers in robot-assisted RYGB are safe and feasible, laparoscopic staplers improve efficiency, reduce resource use, and lower costs without compromising patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11807049/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143374851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comment on: \"3D Da Vinci robotic surgery: is it a risk to the surgeon's eye health?\" by Molle, et al.","authors":"Cheng Tang, Jin-Jin Chen, Jin Yuan, Jin-Jin Huang, Tao Yan","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02226-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02226-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"63"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143366369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comment on: \"KangDuo surgical robot versus da Vinci robotic system in urologic surgery: a systematic review and meta‑analysis\".","authors":"Yi Liu, Hongjie Chen, Ninggang Yang","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02235-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02235-2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"64"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143366374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Trends in adoption of robotics in arthroplasty: an analysis of the Indian landscape.","authors":"Praharsha Mulpur, Tarun Jayakumar, Rajeev Reddy Kikkuri, Adarsh Annapareddy, Kushal Hippalgaonkar, A V Gurava Reddy","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02224-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02224-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robotic-assisted technology in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) offers improved precision in component placement and alignment, addressing challenges, such as ligament imbalance, malalignment, and patient dissatisfaction. In India, where diverse healthcare settings exist, trends in robotic adoption remain underexplored. This study examines the adoption patterns and geographic distribution of robotic systems for TJA in India, highlighting market dynamics over the past 5 years. A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using data from manufacturers of robotic arthroplasty systems. Annual installations, tier-wise city classifications, and geographic distributions were analyzed. Statistical methods included descriptive analysis for installation trends, time-series visualization for adoption trajectories, and linear regression to forecast 2025 installations. As of September 2024, 290 robotic systems were installed across India. Among these, the CUVIS system (Meril) accounted for 89 installations (30.7%), followed by CORI (Smith and Nephew) with 66 installations (22.8%), and VELYS (DePuy) with 52 installations (17.9%). The MAKO system (Stryker) contributed 38 installations (13.1%), while MISSO (Meril) and ROSA (Zimmer) had 25 (8.6%) and 20 (6.9%) installations, respectively. Tier I hospitals dominated with 50% of installations, while Tier III and IV facilities accounted for only 10%. Linear regression predicts steady growth, with over 80 new robotic installations in 2025. Robotic technology adoption in Indian TJA has surged, with a strong preference for systems offering precision and versatility. However, barriers such as high costs and limited training impede penetration in lower tier facilities. Addressing these challenges could enhance equitable access and support the integration of robotics into diverse healthcare settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"62"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143366383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Telerobotics for the treatment of cardiovascular and stroke events.","authors":"Riccardo Oliva, Eduardo Fonseca, Jacques Marescaux","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02218-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02218-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143190920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparison of short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for patients ≥ 65 years of age: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.","authors":"Konstantinos Kossenas, Olga Moutzouri, Filippos Georgopoulos","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02222-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02222-7","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robotic right colectomy (RRC) has been researched and compared in the past to the laparoscopic approach (LRC). However, it remains unclear whether RRC outperforms LRC in patients aged 65 or older with colon cancer or adenoma. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the short-term outcomes of RRC to LRC in this particular age group. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for related literature. Studies and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Inverse variances weighted mean differences (WMD) with random effects model were used for continuous values, and odds ratios (OR) with random effects model using the Mantel-Haenszel's formula were used for dichotomous values. Heterogeneity using Higgins I² and p values were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was performed for operative duration and number of harvested lymph nodes. In total 382 patients, 157 in RRC and 225 in LRC, were included in this study. A statistically significant increase of 43.91 min [95%CI: 19.61, 68.22], P = 0.001, was observed regarding operative duration in the RRC group, compared to LRC, but with high heterogeneity, I² = 89%. However, a statistically significant decrease of 42% [OR = 0.58 (0.34, 0.98), P = 0.04, I²=2%] was observed with regard to overall complications in RRC compared to LRC. Non-significant differences between the two approaches were observed in the number of harvested lymph nodes [WMD = 0.44 (95%CI: -3.94, 4.82), P = 0.85, I² = 52%], wound infections [OR = 0.63 (95%CI: 0.11, 3.52), P = 0.60, I² = 13%], rate of ileus [OR = 0.29 (95%CI: 0.08, 1.00), P = 0.05, I² = 0%], length of hospitalization [WMD = 0.18 (95%CI: - 0.74, 1.11), P = 0.70, I² = 0%], and anastomotic leakage [OR = 0.52 (95%CI: 0.09, 3.11), P = 0.47, I² = 0%]. The results of the operative duration and number of harvested lymph nodes remained statistically significant and non-significant, respectively, after sensitivity analysis. Robotic right colectomy appears to require a longer operative duration, but possibly offers lower rates of overall complications, compared to laparoscopic right colectomy in patients ≥ 65 years of age. Due to the lack of studies identified in the literature, and the ones included being non-randomized, no solid conclusions can be drawn and cautious interpretation of the results is advised. Future studies are necessary to further examine both short- and long-term outcomes. Prospero registration: CRD42024603354.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"60"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143190918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}