Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 12/2007

01-12-2007

A computerized analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic task performance

Authors: Vimal K. Narula, William C. Watson, S. Scott Davis, Kristen Hinshaw, Bradley J. Needleman, Dean J. Mikami, Jeffrey W. Hazey, John H. Winston, P. Muscarella, Mike Rubin, Vipul Patel, W. Scott Melvin

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 12/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Robotic technology has been postulated to improve performance in advanced surgical skills. We utilized a novel computerized assessment system to objectively describe the technical enhancement in task performance comparing robotic and laparoscopic instrumentation.

Methods and procedures

Advanced laparoscopic surgeons (2–10 yrs experience) performed three unique task modules using laparoscopic and Telerobotic surgical instrumentation (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA). Performance was evaluated using a computerized assessment system (ProMIS, Dublin, Ireland) and results were recorded as time (s), path (mm) and precision. Each surgeon had an initial training session followed by two testing sessions for each module. A paired Student’s t-test was used to analyze the data.

Results

Ten surgeons completed the study. 8/10 surgeons had significant technical enhancement utilizing robotic technology.

Conclusions

The ProMIS computerized assessment system can be modified to objectively obtain task performance data with robotic instrumentation. All the tasks were performed faster and with more precision using the robotic technology than standard laparoscopy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Chang L, Satava RM, Pellegrini CA, Sinanan MN (2003) Robotic Surgery – Identifying the learning curve through objective measurement of skill. Surg Endosc 17:1744–1748CrossRefPubMed Chang L, Satava RM, Pellegrini CA, Sinanan MN (2003) Robotic Surgery – Identifying the learning curve through objective measurement of skill. Surg Endosc 17:1744–1748CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Ballantyne GH (2002) The pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery: challenges for robotics and telerobotic surgery. Surg Lap Endosc Perc Tech 12:1–5CrossRef Ballantyne GH (2002) The pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery: challenges for robotics and telerobotic surgery. Surg Lap Endosc Perc Tech 12:1–5CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Pagni S, Qagish NK, Senior DG, Spence PA (1997) Anastomotic complications in minimally invasive coronary bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 63:S64–67CrossRefPubMed Pagni S, Qagish NK, Senior DG, Spence PA (1997) Anastomotic complications in minimally invasive coronary bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 63:S64–67CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
go back to reference Rosser JC, Rosser LE, Savalgi RS (1997) Skill acquisition and assessment for laparoscopic surgery. Arch Surg 132:200–204PubMed Rosser JC, Rosser LE, Savalgi RS (1997) Skill acquisition and assessment for laparoscopic surgery. Arch Surg 132:200–204PubMed
6.
go back to reference Dakin GF, Gagner M (2003) Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc 17:574–579CrossRefPubMed Dakin GF, Gagner M (2003) Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc 17:574–579CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, Schneider C, Ellison EC (2002) Computer enhanced versus standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 6:11–16CrossRefPubMed Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, Schneider C, Ellison EC (2002) Computer enhanced versus standard laparoscopic antireflux surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 6:11–16CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Strayer MP, et al. (2001) Computer enhanced “robotic “ telesurgery versus standard laparoscopy: performance on a skills test. [Abstract] – SAGES Annual meeting, St Louis, MO, USA Strayer MP, et al. (2001) Computer enhanced “robotic “ telesurgery versus standard laparoscopy: performance on a skills test. [Abstract] – SAGES Annual meeting, St Louis, MO, USA
9.
go back to reference Yohannes P, Rotariu P, Pinto P, Smith AD, Lee BR (2002) Comaprison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills : is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 60: 39–45CrossRefPubMed Yohannes P, Rotariu P, Pinto P, Smith AD, Lee BR (2002) Comaprison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills : is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 60: 39–45CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Nio D, Bemelman WA, Boer KT, Dunker MS, Gouma DJ, Gulik TM (2002) Efficiency of manual versus robotically assist laparoscopic sugery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16: 412–415CrossRefPubMed Nio D, Bemelman WA, Boer KT, Dunker MS, Gouma DJ, Gulik TM (2002) Efficiency of manual versus robotically assist laparoscopic sugery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16: 412–415CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Van Sickle KR, McClusky DA 3rd, Gallagher AG, Smith CD (2005) Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task. Surg Endosc 19: 1227–1231CrossRefPubMed Van Sickle KR, McClusky DA 3rd, Gallagher AG, Smith CD (2005) Construct validation of the ProMIS simulator using a novel laparoscopic suturing task. Surg Endosc 19: 1227–1231CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A computerized analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic task performance
Authors
Vimal K. Narula
William C. Watson
S. Scott Davis
Kristen Hinshaw
Bradley J. Needleman
Dean J. Mikami
Jeffrey W. Hazey
John H. Winston
P. Muscarella
Mike Rubin
Vipul Patel
W. Scott Melvin
Publication date
01-12-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 12/2007
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9363-0

Other articles of this Issue 12/2007

Surgical Endoscopy 12/2007 Go to the issue