Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2014

01-01-2014

Solo-surgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a joystick-guided camera device: a case–control study

Authors: Sonja Gillen, Benedikt Pletzer, Arthur Heiligensetzer, Petra Wolf, Jörg Kleeff, Hubertus Feussner, Alois Fürst

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of a joystick-controlled camera holder (Soloassist; Actormed, Barbing, Germany) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy as so-called solo-surgery compared with the standard operation.

Methods

Of the 123 patients included in this study, 63 underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the Soloassist system and were compared with 60 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with human assistance. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, sex, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiology classification. The surgeons were divided into those highly experienced and those experienced with the new camera holder. The operation times were measured, including setup and dismantling of the system. The assessment also included complications, postoperative hospital stay, measurement of human resources in terms of personnel/minutes/operation, and subjective evaluation of the camera-guiding device by the surgeons.

Results

The hospital stay and operation-related complications were not enhanced in the Soloassist group. The differences in core operation time (p = 0.008) and total operating time (p = 0.001) significantly favored the human assistant. Whereas the absolute duration of surgery was longer, the relative operating time (in personnel/minutes/operation) was significantly shorter (p < 0.001). In 4.8 % of the cases, the operation could not be performed completely with the camera-holding device. Clinically relevant postoperative complications did not occur. The experience of the surgeons did not differ significantly. The subjective evaluation regarding handling, image quality, effort, and satisfaction demonstrated high acceptance of the Soloassist system.

Conclusions

The camera-guiding device can be implemented without increased complications. The Soloassist system is safe and can be operated even by colleagues without system experience. All the surgeons rated their satisfaction with the system as very good to excellent. Although the operating times were longer than with the standard camera guidance, the absolute overall staff time was reduced.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cleary K, Nguyen C (2001) State of the art in surgical robotics: clinical applications and technology challenges. Comput Aided Surg 6:312–328PubMedCrossRef Cleary K, Nguyen C (2001) State of the art in surgical robotics: clinical applications and technology challenges. Comput Aided Surg 6:312–328PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Harris SJ, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q, Hibberd RD, Davies BL, Wickham JE, Nathan MS, Kundu B (1997) The Probot: an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 211:317–325PubMedCrossRef Harris SJ, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q, Hibberd RD, Davies BL, Wickham JE, Nathan MS, Kundu B (1997) The Probot: an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 211:317–325PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Challacombe BJ, Khan MS, Murphy D, Dasgupta P (2006) The history of robotics in urology. World J Urol 24:120–127PubMedCrossRef Challacombe BJ, Khan MS, Murphy D, Dasgupta P (2006) The history of robotics in urology. World J Urol 24:120–127PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Broeders IA, Ruurda JP (2002) Robotics in laparoscopic surgery: current status and future perspectives. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 236:76–80PubMedCrossRef Broeders IA, Ruurda JP (2002) Robotics in laparoscopic surgery: current status and future perspectives. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 236:76–80PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Okada S, Tanaba Y, Yamauchi H, Sato S (1998) Single-surgeon thoracoscopic surgery with a voice-controlled robot. Lancet 351:1249PubMedCrossRef Okada S, Tanaba Y, Yamauchi H, Sato S (1998) Single-surgeon thoracoscopic surgery with a voice-controlled robot. Lancet 351:1249PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Aiono S, Gilbert JM, Soin B, Finlay PA, Gordan A (2002) Controlled trial of the introduction of a robotic camera assistant (EndoAssist) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16:1267–1270PubMedCrossRef Aiono S, Gilbert JM, Soin B, Finlay PA, Gordan A (2002) Controlled trial of the introduction of a robotic camera assistant (EndoAssist) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16:1267–1270PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Polet R, Donnez J (2008) Using a laparoscope manipulator (LAPMAN) in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Surg Technol Int 17:187–191PubMed Polet R, Donnez J (2008) Using a laparoscope manipulator (LAPMAN) in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Surg Technol Int 17:187–191PubMed
9.
go back to reference Arezzo A, Testa T, Ulmer F, Schurr MO, Degregori M, Buess GF (2000) Positioning systems for endoscopic solo-surgery. Minerva Chir 55:635–641PubMed Arezzo A, Testa T, Ulmer F, Schurr MO, Degregori M, Buess GF (2000) Positioning systems for endoscopic solo-surgery. Minerva Chir 55:635–641PubMed
10.
go back to reference Geis WP, Kim HC, Brennan EJ Jr, McAfee PC, Wang Y (1996) Robotic arm enhancement to accommodate improved efficiency and decreased resource utilization in complex minimally invasive surgical procedures. Stud Health Technol Inform 29:471–481PubMed Geis WP, Kim HC, Brennan EJ Jr, McAfee PC, Wang Y (1996) Robotic arm enhancement to accommodate improved efficiency and decreased resource utilization in complex minimally invasive surgical procedures. Stud Health Technol Inform 29:471–481PubMed
11.
go back to reference Gilbert JM (2009) The EndoAssist robotic camera holder as an aid to the introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:389–393PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Gilbert JM (2009) The EndoAssist robotic camera holder as an aid to the introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:389–393PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Allaf ME, Jackman SV, Schulam PG, Cadeddu JA, Lee BR, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR (1998) Laparoscopic visual field: voice vs foot pedal interfaces for control of the AESOP robot. Surg Endosc 12:1415–1418PubMedCrossRef Allaf ME, Jackman SV, Schulam PG, Cadeddu JA, Lee BR, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR (1998) Laparoscopic visual field: voice vs foot pedal interfaces for control of the AESOP robot. Surg Endosc 12:1415–1418PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Nebot PB, Jain Y, Haylett K, Stone R, McCloy R (2003) Comparison of task performance of the camera-holder robots EndoAssist and Aesop. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 13:334–338PubMedCrossRef Nebot PB, Jain Y, Haylett K, Stone R, McCloy R (2003) Comparison of task performance of the camera-holder robots EndoAssist and Aesop. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 13:334–338PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kavoussi LR, Moore RG, Adams JB, Partin AW (1995) Comparison of robotic versus human laparoscopic camera control. J Urol 154:2134–2136PubMedCrossRef Kavoussi LR, Moore RG, Adams JB, Partin AW (1995) Comparison of robotic versus human laparoscopic camera control. J Urol 154:2134–2136PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Omote K, Feussner H, Ungeheuer A, Arbter K, Wei GQ, Siewert JR, Hirzinger G (1999) Self-guided robotic camera control for laparoscopic surgery compared with human camera control. Am J Surg 177:321–324PubMedCrossRef Omote K, Feussner H, Ungeheuer A, Arbter K, Wei GQ, Siewert JR, Hirzinger G (1999) Self-guided robotic camera control for laparoscopic surgery compared with human camera control. Am J Surg 177:321–324PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Kraft BM, Jager C, Kraft K, Leibl BJ, Bittner R (2004) The AESOP robot system in laparoscopic surgery: increased risk or advantage for surgeon and patient? Surg Endosc 18:1216–1223PubMedCrossRef Kraft BM, Jager C, Kraft K, Leibl BJ, Bittner R (2004) The AESOP robot system in laparoscopic surgery: increased risk or advantage for surgeon and patient? Surg Endosc 18:1216–1223PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring: review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 16:1389–1402PubMedCrossRef Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring: review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 16:1389–1402PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Jaspers JE, Breedveld P, Herder JL, Grimbergen CA (2004) Camera and instrument holders and their clinical value in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14:145–152PubMedCrossRef Jaspers JE, Breedveld P, Herder JL, Grimbergen CA (2004) Camera and instrument holders and their clinical value in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14:145–152PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Long JA, Descotes JL, Skowron O, Troccaz J, Cinquin P, Boillot B, Terrier N, Rambeaud JJ (2006) Use of robotics in laparoscopic urological surgery: state of the art. Prog Urol 16:3–11PubMed Long JA, Descotes JL, Skowron O, Troccaz J, Cinquin P, Boillot B, Terrier N, Rambeaud JJ (2006) Use of robotics in laparoscopic urological surgery: state of the art. Prog Urol 16:3–11PubMed
20.
go back to reference Yoshino I, Yasunaga T, Hashizume M, Maehara Y (2005) A novel endoscope manipulator, Naviot, enables solo-surgery to be performed during video-assisted thoracic surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 4:404–405PubMedCrossRef Yoshino I, Yasunaga T, Hashizume M, Maehara Y (2005) A novel endoscope manipulator, Naviot, enables solo-surgery to be performed during video-assisted thoracic surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 4:404–405PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Tanoue K, Yasunaga T, Kobayashi E, Miyamoto S, Sakuma I, Dohi T, Konishi K, Yamaguchi S, Kinjo N, Takenaka K, Maehara Y, Hashizume M (2006) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a newly developed laparoscope manipulator for 10 patients with cholelithiasis. Surg Endosc 20:753–756PubMedCrossRef Tanoue K, Yasunaga T, Kobayashi E, Miyamoto S, Sakuma I, Dohi T, Konishi K, Yamaguchi S, Kinjo N, Takenaka K, Maehara Y, Hashizume M (2006) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a newly developed laparoscope manipulator for 10 patients with cholelithiasis. Surg Endosc 20:753–756PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Reichenspurner H, Boehm DH, Welz A, Schulze C, Zwissler B, Reichart B (1998) 3D-video- and robot-assisted minimally invasive ASD closure using the Port-Access techniques. Heart Surg Forum 1:104–106PubMed Reichenspurner H, Boehm DH, Welz A, Schulze C, Zwissler B, Reichart B (1998) 3D-video- and robot-assisted minimally invasive ASD closure using the Port-Access techniques. Heart Surg Forum 1:104–106PubMed
23.
go back to reference Kristin J, Geiger R, Knapp FB, Schipper J, Klenzner T (2011) Use of a mechatronic robotic camera holding system in head and neck surgery. HNO 59:575–581PubMedCrossRef Kristin J, Geiger R, Knapp FB, Schipper J, Klenzner T (2011) Use of a mechatronic robotic camera holding system in head and neck surgery. HNO 59:575–581PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Herman B, Dehez B, Duy KT, Raucent B, Dombre E, Krut S (2009) Design and preliminary in vivo validation of a robotic laparoscope holder for minimally invasive surgery. Int J Med Robot 5:319–326PubMed Herman B, Dehez B, Duy KT, Raucent B, Dombre E, Krut S (2009) Design and preliminary in vivo validation of a robotic laparoscope holder for minimally invasive surgery. Int J Med Robot 5:319–326PubMed
Metadata
Title
Solo-surgical laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a joystick-guided camera device: a case–control study
Authors
Sonja Gillen
Benedikt Pletzer
Arthur Heiligensetzer
Petra Wolf
Jörg Kleeff
Hubertus Feussner
Alois Fürst
Publication date
01-01-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3142-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2014 Go to the issue