Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Häufige urologisch-sexualmedizinische Themen in der Praxis sind das Thema des MMW-Webinars am 5. Juni von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. Konkret geht es um die Frage, wann bei Harnwegsinfektionen auf Antibiotika verzichtet werden kann, und um ein Update zur Therapie von Libido- und Potenzstörungen des Mannes. Der dritte Vortrag behandelt sexuell übertragbare Krankheiten. Stellen Sie Ihre Fragen an die Experten und sammeln Sie 2 CME-Punkte. Jetzt gleich anmelden!
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Surgical Endoscopy
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2008

01.02.2008 | Consensus Statement

A consensus document on robotic surgery

verfasst von: D. M. Herron, M. Marohn, The SAGES-MIRA Robotic Surgery Consensus Group

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 2/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

Robotic surgical devices have developed beyond the investigational stage and currently are routinely used in minimally invasive general surgery, pediatric surgery, gynecology, urology, cardiothoracic surgery, and otorhinolaryngology. Robotic devices continue to evolve. As they become less expensive and more widely disseminated, these devices likely will become more frequently used in surgical procedures. The leadership of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and the Minimally Invasive Robotic Association (MIRA) believed that guidelines for the use of robots in surgery were lacking, and that the surgical community would benefit from a consensus statement on robotic surgery including guidelines for training and credentialing. …
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Allaf M, Patriciu A, Mazilu D, Kavoussi L, Stoianovici D (2004) Overview and fundamentals of urologic robot-integrated systems. Urol Clin North Am 31:671–682CrossRefPubMed
2.
Argenziano M, Katz M, Bonatti J, Srivastava S, Murphy D, Poirier R, Loulmet D, Siwek L, Kreaden U, Ligon D, TECAB Trial Investigators (2006). Results of the prospective multicenter trial of robotically assisted totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 81:1666–1674CrossRefPubMed
3.
Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R (2006) Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 49:866–871. Epub 2006 March 10CrossRefPubMed
4.
Badani KK, Bhandari A, Tewari A, Menon M (2005) Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional suturing: is there a difference in a robotic surgery setting? J Endourol 19:1212–1215CrossRefPubMed
5.
Badani KK, Hemal AK, Fumo M, Kaul S, Shrivastava A, Rajendram AK, Yusoff NA, Sundram M, Woo S, Peabody JO, Mohamed SR, Menon M. (2006) Robotic extended pyelolithotomy for treatment of renal calculi: a feasibility study. World J Urol 24:198–201. Epub 2006 May 16CrossRefPubMed
6.
Badani KK, Hemal AK, Peabody JO, Menon M (2006) Robotic radical prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute training experience. World J Urol 24:148–151. Epub 2006 April 11CrossRefPubMed
7.
Berguer R, Smith W (2006) An ergonomic comparison of robotic and laparoscopic technique: the influence of surgeon experience and task complexity. J Surg Res 134:87–92. Epub 2005 December 27CrossRefPubMed
8.
Bhandari A, McIntire L, Kaul SA, Hemal AK, Peabody JO, Menon M (2005) Perioperative complications of robotic radical prostatectomy after the learning curve. J Urol 174:915–918CrossRefPubMed
9.
Bodner J, Kafka-Ritsch R, Lucciarini P, Fish JH III, Schmid T (2005) A critical comparison of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic splenectomies. World J Surg 29:982–985CrossRefPubMed
10.
Bodner JC, Zitt M, Ott H, Wetscher GJ, Wykypiel H, Lucciarini P, Schmid T (2005) Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) for benign and malignant esophageal tumors. Ann Thorac Surg 80:1202–1206CrossRefPubMed
11.
Bodnera J, Augustina F, Wykypiela H, Fisha J, Muehlmanna G, Wetscherb G, Schmida T (2005) The da Vinci robotic system for general surgical applications: a critical interim appraisal. Swiss Med Wkly 135:674–678
12.
Bonaros N, Schachner T, Oehlinger A, Ruetzler E, Kolbitsch C, Dichtl W, Mueller S, Laufer G, Bonatti J (2006) Robotically assisted totally endoscopic atrial septal defect repair: insights from operative times, learning curves, and clinical outcome. Ann Thorac Surg 82:687–693CrossRefPubMed
13.
Bonatti J, Schachner T, Bonaros N, Ohlinger A, Danzmayr M, Jonetzko P, Friedrich G, Kolbitsch C, Mair P, Laufer G (2006) Technical challenges in totally endoscopic robotic coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 131:146–153CrossRefPubMed
14.
Boyd WD, Desai ND, Kiaii B, Rayman R, Menkis AH, McKenzie FN, Novick RJ (2000) A comparison of robot-assisted versus manually constructed endoscopic coronary anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg 70:839–842CrossRefPubMed
15.
Boyd WD, Kiaii B, Kodera K, Rayman R, Abu-Khudair W, Fazel S, Dobkowski WB, Ganapathy S, Jablonsky G, Novick RJ (2002) Early experience with robotically assisted internal thoracic artery harvest. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:52–57CrossRefPubMed
16.
Boyd WD, Rayman R, Desai ND, Menkis AH, Dobkowski W, Ganapathy S, Kiaii B, Jablonsky G, McKenzie FN, Novick RJ (2000) Closed-chest coronary artery bypass grafting on the beating heart with the use of a computer-enhanced surgical robotic system. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 120:807–809CrossRefPubMed
17.
Challacombe BJ, Khan MS, Murphy D, Dasgupta P (2006) The history of robotics in urology. World J Urol 24:120–127. Epub 2006 March 22CrossRefPubMed
18.
Chitwood WR Jr, Nifong LW, Chapman WH, Felger JE, Bailey BM, Ballint T, Mendleson KG, Kim VB, Young JA, Albrecht RA (2001) Robotic surgical training in an academic institution. Ann Surg 234:475–484CrossRefPubMed
19.
Costi R, Himpens J, Bruyns J, Cadiere GB (2003) Robotic fundoplication: from theoretic advantages to real problems. J Am Coll Surg 197:500–507CrossRefPubMed
20.
Dakin GF, Gagner M (2003) Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc 17:574–579. Epub 2003 February 17CrossRefPubMed
21.
Donias HW, Karamanoukian HL, D’Ancona G, Hoover EL (2002) Applying robotic assistance to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 235:446PubMed
22.
Elliott DS, Chow GK, Gettman M (2006) Current status of robotics in female urology and gynecology. World J Urol 24:188–192. Epub 2006 March 24CrossRefPubMed
23.
Elliott DS, Frank I, Dimarco DS, Chow GK (2004) Gynecologic use of robotically assisted laparoscopy: sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high-grade vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Surg 188:52S–56SCrossRefPubMed
24.
Elliott DS, Krambeck AE, Chow GK (2006) Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high-grade vaginal vault prolapse. J Urol 176:655–659CrossRefPubMed
25.
El-Tabey NA, Shoma AM (2005) Port-site metastases after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. Urology 66:1110CrossRefPubMed
26.
Farnham SB, Webster TM, Herrell SD, Smith JA Jr (2006) Intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 67:360–363CrossRefPubMed
27.
Felger JE, Nifong LW, Chitwood WR Jr (2002) The evolution of and early experience with robot-assisted mitral valve surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:58–63CrossRefPubMed
28.
Galich A, Sterrett S, Nazemi T, Pohlman G, Smith L, Balaji KC (2006) Comparative analysis of early perioperative outcomes following radical cystectomy by either the robotic or open method. JSLS 10:145–150PubMed
29.
Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Moser F, Baptista M, Donahue P, Horgan S (2006) Laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia facilitated by robotic assistance. Surg Endosc 20:1105–1112. Epub 2006 May 13CrossRefPubMed
30.
Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, Sbrana F, Cecconi S, Balestracci T, Caravaglios G (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg 138:777–784CrossRefPubMed
31.
Gorodner V, Horgan S, Galvani C, Manzelli A, Oberholzer J, Sankary H, Testa G, Benedetti E (2006) Routine left robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is safe and effective regardless of the presence of vascular anomalies. Transpl Int 19:636–640CrossRefPubMed
32.
Hanly EJ, Marohn MR, Bachman SL, Talamini MA, Hacker SO, Howard RS, Schenkman NS (2004) Multiservice laparoscopic surgical training using the daVinci surgical system. Am J Surg 187:309–315CrossRefPubMed
33.
Hanly EJ, Miller BE, Kumar R, Hasser CJ, Coste-Maniere E, Talamini MA, Aurora AA, Schenkman NS, Marohn MR (2006) Mentoring console improves collaboration and teaching in surgical robotics. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 16:445–451CrossRefPubMed
34.
35.
Hanly EJ, Zand J, Bachman SL, Marohn MR, Talamini MA (2005) Value of the SAGES Learning Center in introducing new technology. Surg Endosc 19:477–483. Epub 2005 February 10CrossRefPubMed
36.
Hashizume M, Sugimachi K (2003) Robot-assisted gastric surgery. Surg Clin North Am 83:1429–1444CrossRefPubMed
37.
Hashizume M, Tsugawa K (2004) Robotic surgery and cancer: the present state, problems, and future vision. Jpn J Clin Oncol 34:227–237CrossRefPubMed
38.
Hayashibe M, Suzuki N, Hattori A, Suzuki S, Konishi K, Kakeji Y, Hashizume M (2005) Surgical robot setup simulation with consistent kinematics and haptics for abdominal surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 111:164–166PubMed
39.
Hemal AK, Abol-Enein H, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Shoma AM, Ghoneim MA, Menon M (2004) Robotic radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in the management of bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 31:719–729CrossRefPubMed
40.
Hemal AK, Menon M (2002) Laparoscopy, robot, telesurgery, and urology: future perspective. J Postgrad Med 48:39–41PubMed
41.
42.
Hockstein NG, O’Malley BW Jr, Weinstein GS (2006) Assessment of intraoperative safety in transoral robotic surgery. Laryngoscope 116:165–168CrossRefPubMed
43.
Hockstein NG, Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr (2005) Maintenance of hemostasis in transoral robotic surgery. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 67:220–224. Epub 2005 September 5PubMed
44.
Horgan S, Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Jacobsen GR, Moser F, Manzelli A, Oberholzer J, Fisichella MP, Bogetti D, Testa G, Sankary HN, Benedetti E (2007) Effect of robotic assistance on the “learning curve” for laparoscopic hand-assisted donor nephrectomy. Surg Endosc 21:1512–1517. Epub 2007 Febraury 8
45.
Horgan S, Galvani C, Gorodner MV, Omelanczuck P, Elli F, Moser F, Durand L, Caracoche M, Nefa J, Bustos S, Donahue P, Ferraina P (2005) Robotic-assisted Heller myotomy versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy for the treatment of esophageal achalasia: multicenter study. J Gastrointest Surg 9:1020–1029CrossRefPubMed
46.
Hourmont K, Chung W, Pereira S, Wasielewski A, Davies R, Ballantyne GH (2003) Robotic versus telerobotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: duration of surgery and outcomes. Surg Clin North Am 83:1445–1462CrossRefPubMed
47.
Hubens G, Coveliers H, Balliu L, Ruppert M, Vaneerdeweg W (2003) A performance study comparing manual and robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci system. Surg Endosc 17:1595–1599. Epub 2003 July 21CrossRefPubMed
48.
Joseph JV, Vicente I, Madeb R, Erturk E, Patel HR (2005) Robot-assisted vs pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: are there any differences? BJU Int 96:39–42CrossRefPubMed
49.
Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal A, Savera A, Shrivastava A, Menon M (2005) Robotic radical prostatectomy with preservation of the prostatic fascia: a feasibility study. Urology 66:1261–1265CrossRefPubMed
50.
Kernstine KH, DeArmond DT, Karimi M, Van Natta TL, Campos JC, Yoder MR, Everett JE (2004) The robotic, 2–stage, 3-field esophagolymphadenectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 127:1847–1849CrossRefPubMed
51.
Kiaii B, McClure RS, Stitt L, Rayman R, Dobkowski WB, Jablonsky G, Novick RJ, Boyd WD (2006) Prospective angiographic comparison of direct, endoscopic, and telesurgical approaches to harvesting the internal thoracic artery. Ann Thorac Surg 82:624–628CrossRefPubMed
52.
Kodera K, Kiaii B, Rayman R, Novick RJ, Boyd WD (2001) Closed chest CABG on the beating heart with a computer-enhanced articulating system: case report. Heart Surg Forum 4:305–306PubMed
53.
Kumar R, Hemal AK, Menon M (2005) Robotic renal and adrenal surgery: present and future. BJU Int 96:244–249CrossRefPubMed
54.
Lee RS, Retik AB, Borer JG, Peters CA (2006) Pediatric robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: comparison with a cohort of open surgery. Urology 175:683–687CrossRef
55.
Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, Gettman MT (2004) The new economics of radical prostatectomy: cost comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted techniques. Urology 172:1431–1435CrossRef
56.
Menkis AH, Kodera K, Kiaii B, Swinamer SA, Rayman R, Boyd WD (2004) Robotic surgery, the first 100 cases: where do we go from here? Heart Surg Forum 7:1–4PubMed
57.
Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Bhandari A (2004) The technique of apical dissection of the prostate and urethrovesical anastomosis in robotic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 93:715–719CrossRefPubMed
58.
Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Shoma AM, El-Tabey NA, Shaaban A, Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA (2003) Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int 92:232–236CrossRefPubMed
59.
Menon M, Kaul S, Bhandari A, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Hemal A (2005) Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: a questionnaire-based analysis of outcomes after conventional nerve-sparing and prostatic fascia-sparing techniques. J Urol 174:2291–2296CrossRefPubMed
60.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A (2005) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic. Urology 66:101–104CrossRefPubMed
61.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Sarle R, Hemal A, Peabody JO, Vallancien G (2002) Laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168:945–949CrossRefPubMed
62.
Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2002) Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 60:864–868CrossRefPubMed
63.
Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody JO, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal AK (2004) Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: experience of over 1,100 cases. Urol Clin North Am 31:701–717CrossRefPubMed
64.
Morgan JA, Thornton BA, Peacock JC, Hollingsworth KW, Smith CR, Oz MC, Argenziano M (2005) Does robotic technology make minimally invasive cardiac surgery too expensive? A hospital cost analysis of robotic and conventional techniques. J Card Surg 20:246–251CrossRefPubMed
65.
Muhlmann G, Klaus A, Kirchmayr W, Wykypiel H, Unger A, Holler E, Nehoda H, Aigner F, Weiss HG. (2003) DaVinci robotic-assisted laparoscopic bariatric surgery: is it justified in a routine setting? Obes Surg 13:848–854CrossRefPubMed
66.
Nazemi T, Galich A, Smith L, Balaji KC (2006) Robotic urological surgery in patients with prior abdominal operations is not associated with increased complications. Int J Urol 13:248–251CrossRefPubMed
67.
Nazemi T, Galich A, Sterrett S, Klingler D, Smith L, Balaji KC (2006) Radical nephrectomy performed by open, laparoscopy with or without hand assistance or robotic methods by the same surgeon produces comparable perioperative results. Clin Urol 32:15–22
68.
Nio D, Balm R, Maartense S, Guijt M, Bemelman WA (2004) The efficacy of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic vascular anastomoses in an experimental model. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 27:283–286PubMed
69.
Nio D, Bemelman WA, Balm R, Legemate DA (2005) Laparoscopic vascular anastomoses: does robotic (Zeus-Aesop) assistance help to overcome the learning curve? Surg Endosc 19:1071–1076. Epub 2005 May 26CrossRefPubMed
70.
Nio D, Bemelman WA, Boer KT, Dunker MS, Gouma DJ, Gulik TM (2002) Efficiency of manual versus robotical (Zeus) assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16:412–415. Epub 2001 November 16CrossRefPubMed
71.
Nio D, Bemelman WA, Busch OR, Vrouenraets BC, Gouma DJ (2004) Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study. Surg Endosc 18:379–382. Epub 2004 January 14CrossRefPubMed
72.
Novick RJ, Fox SA, Kiaii BB, Stitt LW, Rayman R, Kodera K, Menkis AH, Boyd WD (2003) Analysis of the learning curve in telerobotic, beating heart coronary artery bypass grafting: a 90-patient experience. Ann Thorac Surg 76:749–753CrossRefPubMed
73.
O’Malley BW Jr, Weinstein GS, Hockstein NG (2006) Transoral robotic surgery (TORS): glottic microsurgery in a canine model. J Voice 20:263–268. Epub 2006 February 10CrossRefPubMed
74.
O’Malley BW Jr, Weinstein GS, Snyder W, Hockstein NG (2006) Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for base of tongue neoplasms. Laryngoscope 116:1465–1472CrossRefPubMed
75.
Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su LM (2006) Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 49:612–624. Epub 2006 January 18CrossRefPubMed
76.
Raychaudhuri B, Khan MS, Challacombe B, Rimington P, Dasgupta P (2006) Minimally invasive radical cystectomy. BJU Int 98:1064–1067CrossRefPubMed
77.
Rozet F, Harmon J, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Vallancien G (2006) Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 24:171–179. Epub 2006 March 17CrossRefPubMed
78.
Sahabudin RM, Arni T, Ashani N, Arumuga K, Rajenthran S, Murali S, Patel V, Hemal A, Menon M. (2006) Development of robotic program: an Asian experience. World J Urol 24:161–164. Epub 2006 April 11CrossRefPubMed
79.
Sarle R, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Peabody J, Menon M. (2004) Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills. J Endourol 18:63–66CrossRefPubMed
80.
Scales CD Jr, Jones PJ, Eisenstein EL, Preminger GM, Albala DM (2005) Local cost structures and the economics of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 174:2323–2329CrossRefPubMed
81.
Schachner T, Feuchtner GM, Bonatti J, Bonaros N, Oehlinger A, Gassner E, Pachinger O, Friedrich G. (2007) Evaluation of robotic coronary surgery with intraoperative graft angiography and postoperative multislice computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 83:1361–1367CrossRefPubMed
82.
Smith WD, Berguer R, Rosser JC Jr (2003) Wireless virtual instrument measurement of surgeons’ physical and mental workloads for robotic versus manual minimally invasive surgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 94:318–324PubMed
83.
Sterrett S, Mammen T, Nazemi T, Galich A, Peters G, Smith L, Balaji KC. (2007) Major urological oncological surgeries can be performed using minimally invasive robotic or laparoscopic methods with similar early perioperative outcomes compared to conventional open methods. World J Urol 25:193–198. Epub 2006 December 15CrossRefPubMed
84.
Tewari A, Kaul S, Menon M (2005) Robotic radical prostatectomy: a minimally invasive therapy for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 6:45–48CrossRefPubMed
85.
Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M, Members of the VIP Team (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92:205–210CrossRefPubMed
86.
Webster TM, Herrell SD, Chang SS (2005) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective assessment of postoperative pain. J Urol 174:912–914CrossRefPubMed
87.
Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr, Hockstein NG (2005) Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic laryngectomy in a canine model. Laryngoscope 115:1315–1319CrossRefPubMed
88.
Weinstein GS, O’Malley BW Jr, Snyder W, Hockstein NG (2007) Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic partial laryngectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 116:19–23PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
A consensus document on robotic surgery
verfasst von
D. M. Herron
M. Marohn
The SAGES-MIRA Robotic Surgery Consensus Group
Publikationsdatum
01.02.2008
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 2/2008
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9727-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2008

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2008 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Improving rates for screening colonoscopy: Analysis of the health information national trends survey (HINTS I) data

OriginalPaper

Comparison of robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy with traditional laparoscopic adrenalectomy - 1 year follow-up

OriginalPaper

Miniature bending manipulator for fetoscopic intrauterine laser therapy to treat twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome

OriginalPaper

Dual-lumen natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a new method for performing a safe anastomosis

Letter

Use of upper gastrointestinal studies after gastric bypass

OriginalPaper

Effects of experience on force perception threshold in minimally invasive surgery

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Traumatologische Notfälle Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Internistische Arzneimitteltherapie Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

17.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Sie sei „ethisch geboten“, meint Gesundheitsminister Karl Lauterbach: mehr Transparenz über die Qualität von Klinikbehandlungen. Um sie abzubilden, lässt er gegen den Widerstand vieler Länder einen virtuellen Klinik-Atlas freischalten.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.
Bildnachweise