nach oben

Surgical Endoscopy

Erschienen in:

01.04.2014 | Letter To the Editor

The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery

verfasst von: Jeroen Heemskerk, Nicole D. Bouvy, Cor G. M. I. Baeten

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Robot-assisted laparoscopy has been used in a wide variety of surgical fields; however, the financial costs involved are high and convincing proof of superiority in terms of quality of life, cost effectiveness and survival is often lacking. Possibly, there might be small benefits for the patient or for the surgeon’s health that might warrant the use of robotics in limited fields of surgery.

Methods

We performed a critical appraisal of the literature, searching for scientific evidence supporting the use of robotics in daily laparoscopic surgery.

Results

Convincing evidence supporting the use of robotics is lacking.

Conclusion

In an era of worldwide economic crisis, it is about time to start a critical discussion as to whether we should drastically limit, or even abandon, the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and focus on more cost-effective strategies of healthcare improvement. We suggest the use of robotics should be limited to well-powered, randomized clinical trials in a limited field of research.

Tan CT, Cheah WK, Delbridge L (2008) “Scarless” (in the neck) endoscopic thyroidectomy (SET): an evidence-based review of published techniques. World J Surg 32(7):1349–1357PubMed

Lee J, Lee JH, Nah KY et al (2011) Comparison of endoscopic and robotic thyroidectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 18(5):1439–1446PubMed

Fan LJ, Jiang J (2012) Present and future of robot-assisted endoscopic thyroid surgery. Chin Med J (Engl) 125(5):926–931

Yoo H, Chae BJ, Park HS et al (2012) Comparison of surgical outcomes between endoscopic and robotic thyroidectomy. J Surg Oncol 105(7):705–708PubMed

Vriens MR, Kist JWK, Lodewijk L et al (2013) Robotgeassisteerde transaxillaire schildklieroperatie. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 157:A5841PubMed

Landry CS, Grubbs EG, Warneke CL et al (2012) Robot-assisted transaxillary thyroid surgery in the United States: is it comparable to open thyroid lobectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 19(4):1269–1274PubMed

Kim WW, Kim JS, Hur SM et al (2011) Is robotic surgery superior to endoscopic and open surgeries in thyroid cancer? World J Surg 35(4):779–784PubMed

Soop M, Nelson H (2008) Is laparoscopic resection appropriate for colorectal adenocarcinoma? Adv Surg 42:205–217PubMed

Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E et al (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group Trial. Ann Surg 246(4):655–662PubMed

10.

Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC et al (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6(7):477–484PubMed

11.

Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365(9472):1718–1726PubMed

12.

Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF et al (2008) Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the ALSSaS trial. Ann Surg 248(5):728–738PubMed

13.

Trastulli S, Desiderio J, Farinacci F et al (2013) Robotic right colectomy for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis: short-term outcomes from a single institution. Int J Colorectal Dis 28(6):807–814PubMed

14.

Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY et al (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99(9):1219–1226PubMed

15.

Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO et al (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc 26(1):1–11PubMed

16.

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ et al (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53(7):1000–1006PubMed

17.

Delaney CO, Lynch AC, Denagore AJ et al (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46(12):1633–1639PubMed

18.

Fung AK, Aly EH (2013) Robotic colonic surgery: is it advisable to commence a new learning curve? Dis Colon Rectum 56(6):786–796PubMed

19.

Kellokumpu IH, Kairaluoma MI, Nuorva KP et al (2012) Short- and long-term outcome following laparoscopic versus open resection for carcinoma of the rectum in the multimodal setting. Dis Colon Rectum 55(8):854–863PubMed

20.

Stamopoulos P, Theodoropoulos GE, Papailiou J et al (2009) Prospective evaluation of sexual function after open and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 23(12):2665–2674PubMed

21.

Ng SS, Leung KL, Lee JF et al (2009) Long-term morbidity and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted anterior resection for upper rectal cancer: ten-year results of a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 52(4):558–566PubMed

22.

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Ricci J et al (2011) A comparison of open and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 54(3):275–282PubMed

23.

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Marecik SJ et al (2010) Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Dis Colon Rectum 43(12):1611–1617

24.

Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH et al (2010) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer: a case-matched analysis of short-term outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 17(12):3195–3202PubMed

25.

Kim JC, Yang SS, Jang TY et al (2012) Open versus robot-assisted sphincter-saving operations in rectal cancer patients: techniques and comparison of outcomes between groups of 100 matched patients. Int J Med Robot 8(4):468–475PubMed

26.

Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R et al (2012) Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 14(4):e134–e156PubMed

27.

Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J et al (2011) Robotic vs laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum 54(2):151–156PubMed

28.

Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS et al (2013) Short-term clinical outcome of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 27(1):48–55PubMed

29.

Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG et al (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 19(7):2095–2101PubMed

30.

Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY et al (2012) A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 19(8):2485–2493PubMed

31.

D’hoore A, Penninckx F (2006) Laparoscopic ventral recto(colpo)pexy for rectal prolapse: surgical technique and outcome for 109 patients. Surg Endosc 20(12):1919–1923PubMed

32.

D’hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F (2004) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 91(11):1500–1505PubMed

33.

Zittel TT, Manncke K, Haug S et al (2000) Functional results after laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse. J Gastrointest Surg 4(6):632–641PubMed

34.

Rose J, Schneider C, Scheidbach H et al (2002) Laparoscopic treatment of rectal prolapse: experience gained in a prospective multicenter study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 387(3–4):130–137PubMed

35.

Heemskerk J, de Hoog DE, van Gemert WG et al (2007) Robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparative study on costs and time. Dis Colon Rectum 50(11):1825–1830PubMedCentralPubMed

36.

De Hoog DE, Heemskerk J, Nieman FH et al (2009) Recurrence and functional results after open versus conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a case control study. Int J Colorectal Dis 24(10):1201–1206PubMedCentralPubMed

37.

McHoney M, Wade AM, Eaton S et al (2011) Clinical outcome of a randomized controlled blinded trial of open versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication in infants and children. Ann Surg 254(2):209–216PubMed

38.

Draaisma WA, Buskens E, Bais JE et al (2006) Randomized clinical trial and follow-up study of cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus conventional Nissen fundoplication. Br J Surg 93(6):690–697PubMed

39.

Draaisma WA, Rijnhart-de Jong HG, Broeders IA et al (2006) Five-year subjective and objective results of laparoscopic and conventional Nissen fundoplication: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 244(1):34–41PubMedCentralPubMed

40.

Salminen P, Hurme S, Ovaska J (2012) Fifteen-year outcome of laparoscopic and open Nissen fundoplication: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Thorac Surg 93(1):228–233PubMed

41.

Salminen PT, Hiekkanen HI, Rantala AP et al (2007) Comparison of long-term outcome of laparoscopic and conventional Nissen fundoplication: a prospective randomized study with an 11-year follow-up. Ann Surg 246(2):201–206PubMedCentralPubMed

42.

Ackroyd R, Watson DI, Majeed AW et al (2004) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg 91(8):975–982PubMed

43.

Laine S, Rantala A, Gullichsen R et al (1997) Laparoscopic vs conventional Nissen fundoplication: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 11(5):441–444PubMed

44.

Broeders IA, Rijnhart-de Jong HG, Draaisma WA et al (2009) Ten-year outcome of laparoscopic and conventional Nissen fundoplication: randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 250(5):698–706PubMed

45.

Pelgrims N, Closset J, Sperduto N et al (2001) What did the laparoscopic Nissen approach of the gastro-oesophageal reflux really change for the patient 8 years later? Acta Chir Belg 101(2):68–72PubMed

46.

Draaisma WA, Ruurda JP, Scheffer RC et al (2006) Randomized clinical trial of standard laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg 93(11):1351–1359PubMed

47.

Copeland DR, Boneti C, Kokoska ER et al (2008) Evaluation of initial experience and comparison of the da Vinci^® surgical system with established laparoscopic and open pediatric Nissen fundoplication surgery. JSLS 12(3):238–240PubMedCentralPubMed

48.

Muller-Stich BP, Reiter MA, Wente MN et al (2007) Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic fundoplication: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 21(10):1800–1805PubMed

49.

Morino M, Pellegrino L, Giaccone C et al (2006) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Br J Surg 93(5):553–558PubMed

50.

Heemskerk J, van Gemert WG, Greve JW et al (2007) Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a comparative retrospective study on costs and time consumption. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17(1):1–4PubMed

51.

Wang Z, Zheng Q, Jin Z (2012) Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. ANZ J Surg 82(3):112–117PubMed

52.

Masoomi H, Kim H, Reavis KM et al (2011) Analysis of factors predictive of gastro-intestinal tract leak in laparoscopic and open gastric bypass. Arch Surg 146(9):1048–1051PubMed

53.

Nguyen NT, Masoomi H, Laugenour K et al (2011) Predictive factors of mortality in bariatric surgery: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Surgery 150(2):347–351PubMed

54.

Tian HL, Tian JH, Yang KH et al (2011) The effects of laparoscopic vs. open gastric bypass for morbid obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Obes Rev 12(4):254–260PubMed

55.

Ayloo SM, Addeo P, Buchs NC et al (2011) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: is there a difference in outcomes? World J Surg 35(3):637–642PubMed

56.

Sanchez BR, Mohr CJ, Morton JM et al (2005) Comparison of totally robotic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and traditional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis 1(6):549–554PubMed

57.

Scozzari G, Rebecchi F, Millo P et al (2011) Robot-assisted gastrojejunal anastomosis does not improve the results of the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 25(2):597–603PubMed

58.

Hubens G, Balliu L, Ruppert M et al (2008) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure performed with the da Vinci^® robot system: is it worth it? Surg Endosc 22(7):1690–1696PubMed

59.

Fourman MM, Saber AA (2012) Robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8(4):483–488PubMed

60.

Mühlmann G, Klaus A, Kirchmayr W et al (2003) da Vinci^® robotic-assisted laparoscopic bariatric surgery: is it justified in a routine setting? Obes Surg 13(6):848–854PubMed

61.

Hagen ME, Pugin F, Chassot G et al (2012) Reducing cost of surgery by avoiding complications: the model of robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 22(1):52–61PubMed

62.

Meyer DM, Herbert MA, Sobhani NC et al (2009) Comparative clinical outcomes of thymectomy for myasthenia gravis performed by extended transsternal and minimally invasive approaches. Ann Thorac Surg 87(2):385–390PubMed

63.

Toolabi K, Aminian A, Javid MJ et al (2009) Mid-term results of thoracoscopic thymectomy for myasthenia gravis. Neurol India 57(4):402–405PubMed

64.

Wright GM, Barnett S, Clarke CP (2002) Video-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy for myasthenia gravis. Intern Med J 32(8):367–371PubMed

65.

Hartwich J, Tyagi S, Margaron F et al (2012) Robot-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy for treating myasthenia gravis in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 22(9):925–929PubMed

66.

Skelly CL, Jackson CC, Wu Y et al (2003) Thoracoscopic thymectomy in children with myasthenia gravis. Am Surg 69(12):1087–1089PubMed

67.

Rea F, Marulli G, Bortolotti L et al (2006) Experience with the “da Vinci” robotic system for thymectomy in patients with myasthenia gravis: report of 33 cases. Ann Thorac Surg 81(2):455–459PubMed

68.

Marulli G, Rea F, Melfi F et al (2012) Robot-aided thoracoscopic thymectomy for early stage thymoma: a multicenter European study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 144(5):1125–1130PubMed

69.

Marulli G, Schiavon M, Perissinotto E et al (2003) Surgical and neurologic outcomes after robotic thymectomy in 100 consecutive patients with myasthenia gravis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 145(3):730–735

70.

Renaud S, Santelmo N, Renaud M et al (2013) Robotic-assisted thymectomy with da Vinci II versus sternotomy in the surgical treatment of non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis: early results. Rev Neurol (Paris) 169(1):30–36

71.

Rückert JC, Ismail M, Swierzy M et al (2008) Thoracoscopic thymectomy with the da Vinci robotic system^® for myasthenia gravis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1132:329–335PubMed

72.

Papiashvilli M, Sasson L, Azzam S et al (2013) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy versus lobectomy by thoracotomy for lung cancer: pilot study. Innovations (Phila) 8(1):6–11

73.

Hanna WC, de Valence M, Atenafu EG et al (2013) Is video-assisted lobectomy for non-small lung cancer oncologically equivalent to open lobectomy? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 43(6):1121–1125PubMed

74.

Lee PC, Nasar A, Port JL et al (2013) Long-term survival after lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer by video-assisted thoracic surgery versus thoracotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 96(3):951–961PubMed

75.

Liang C, Wen H, Guo Y et al (2013) Severe intraoperative complications during VATS lobectomy compared with thoracotomy lobectomy for early stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Dis 5(4):513–517PubMedCentralPubMed

76.

Marty-Ané CH, Canaud L, Solovei L et al (2013) Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: an unavoidable trend? A retrospective single-institution series of 410 cases. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 17(1):36–43PubMed

77.

Li Z, Liu H, Li L (2012) Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus lobectomy for stage I lung cancer: a meta-analysis of long-term outcomes. Exp Ther Med 3(5):886–892PubMedCentralPubMed

78.

Zhang Z, Zhang Y, Feng H et al (2013) Is video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy better than thoracotomy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 44(3):407–414PubMed

79.

Paul S, Sedrakyan A, Chiu YL et al (2013) Outcomes after lobectomy using thoracoscopy vs thoracotomy: a comparative effectiveness analysis utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 43(4):813–817PubMed

80.

Jett GK (2012) Thoracic robotics at the Heart Hospital Baylor Plano: the first 20 cases. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 25(4):324–326

81.

Gharagozloo F, Margolis M, Tempesta B (2008) Robot-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 85(6):1880–1885PubMed

82.

Gharagozloo F, Margolis M, Tempesta B et al (2009) Robot-assisted lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer: report of 100 consecutive cases. Ann Thorac Surg 88(2):380–384PubMed

83.

Park BJ, Flores RM, Rusch VW (2006) Robotic assistance for video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy: technique and initial results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 131(1):54–59PubMed

84.

Jang HJ, Lee HS, Park SY et al (2011) Comparison of the early robot-assisted lobectomy experience to video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for lung cancer: a single-institution case series matching study. Innovations (Phila) 6(5):305–310

85.

Augustin F, Bodner J, Maier H et al (2013) Robotic-assisted minimally invasive vs. thoracoscopic lung lobectomy: comparison of peri-operative results in a learning curve setting. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398(6):895–901PubMed

86.

Flores RM, Alam N (2008) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (VATS), open thoracotomy, and the robot for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 85(2):S710–S715PubMed

87.

Frumovitz M, dos Reis R, Sun CC et al (2007) Comparison of total laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Obstet Gynaecol 110(1):96–102

88.

Li G, Yan X, Shang H et al (2007) A comparison of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy and laparotomy in the treatment of Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Gynaecol Oncol 105(1):176–180

89.

Kruijdenberg CB, van den Einden LC, Hendriks JC et al (2011) Robot-assisted versus total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer, a review. Gynaecol Oncol 120(3):334–339

90.

Soto E, Lo Y, Friedman K et al (2011) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus da Vinci^® robotic hysterectomy: is using the robot beneficial? J Gynaecol Oncol 22(4):253–259

91.

Pasic RP, Rizzo JA, Fang H et al (2010) Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(6):730–738PubMed

92.

Sarlos D, Kots LA (2011) Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy: a review of recent comparative studies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 23(4):283–288PubMed

93.

Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N et al (2012) Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 120(3):604–611PubMed

94.

Göçmen A, Sanlikan F, Uçar MG (2012) Robot-assisted hysterectomy vs total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes. Int J Med Robot 8(4):453–457PubMed

95.

Hsiao KC, Latchamsetty K, Govier FE et al (2007) Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol 21(8):926–930PubMed

96.

Seror J, Yates DR, Seringe E et al (2012) Prospective comparison of short-term outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. World J Urol 30(3):393–398PubMed

97.

Judd JP, Siddiqui NY, Barnett JC et al (2010) Cost-minimization analysis of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17(4):493–499PubMed

98.

Elliot CS, Hsieh MH, Sokol ER et al (2012) Robot-assisted versus open sacrocolpopexy: a cost-minimization analysis. J Urol 187(2):638–643

99.

Hoyte L, Rabbanifard R, Mezzich J et al (2012) Cost analysis of open versus robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18(6):335–339PubMed

100.

Makhoul B, De la Taille A, Vordos D et al (2004) Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for T1 renal cancer: the gold standard? A comparison of laparoscopic vs open nephrectomy. BJU Int 93(1):67–70PubMed

101.

Favaretto RL, Sanchez-Salas R, Benoist N et al (2013) Oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: mid-term results. J Endourol 27(1):52–57PubMed

102.

Favaretto RL, Shariat SF, Chade DC et al (2010) Comparison between laparoscopic and open radical nephroureterectomy in a contemporary group of patients: are recurrence and disease-specific survival associated with surgical technique? Eur Urol 58(5):645–651PubMed

103.

Zheng JH, Zhang XL, Geng J et al (2013) Long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy. Chin Med J (Engl) 126(15):2938–2942

104.

Hyams E, Pierorazio P, Mullins JK et al (2012) A comparative cost analysis of robot-assisted versus traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 26(7):843–847PubMed

105.

Panumatrassamee K, Autorino R, Laydner H et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for tumor in a solitary kidney: a single institution comparative analysis. Int J Urol 20(5):484–491PubMed

106.

Lee S, Oh J, Hong SK et al (2011) Open versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: effect on clinical outcome. J Endourol 25(7):1181–1185PubMed

107.

Alemozaffar M, Chang SL, Kacker R et al (2013) Comparing costs of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 27(5):560–565PubMed

108.

Ferguson JE 3rd, Goyal RK, Raynor MC et al (2012) Cost analysis of robot-assisted laparoscopic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 26(8):1030–1037PubMed

109.

Boger M, Lucas SM, Popp SC et al (2010) Comparison of robot-assisted nephrectomy with laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. JSLS 14(3):374–380PubMedCentralPubMed

110.

Park JW, Choi KH, Yang SC et al (2012) Cost aspects of radical nephrectomy for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma in Korea: open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted laparoscopic and video-assisted minilaparotomy surgeries. Korean J Urol 53(8):519–523PubMedCentralPubMed

111.

Guazonni G, Cestari A, Naspro R et al (2006) Intra- and peri-operative outcomes comparing radical retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective, randomised, single-surgeon study. Eur Urol 50(1):98–104

112.

Koutlidis N, Mourey E, Champigneulle J et al (2012) Robot-assisted or pure laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: what is the optimal procedure for the surgical margins? A single center experience. Int J Urol 19(12):1076–1081PubMed

113.

Coelho RF, Rocco B, Patel MB et al (2010) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a critical review of outcomes reported by high-volume centers. J Endourol 24(12):2003–2015PubMedCentralPubMed

114.

Asimakopoulos AD, Pereira Fraga CT, Annino F et al (2011) Randomized comparison between laparoscopic and robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med 8(5):1503–1512PubMed

115.

Porpiglia F, Morra I, Lucci Chiarissi M et al (2013) Randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 63(4):606–614PubMed

116.

Lim SK, Kim KH, Shin TY et al (2013) Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: how does it compare with other surgical approaches? Int J Urol 20(3):271–284PubMed

117.

Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92(3):205–210PubMed

118.

Minniti D, Chiadò Piat S, Di Novi C (2011) Robot-assisted versus radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based comparison. Technol Health Care 19(5):331–339PubMed

119.

Willis DL, Gonzalgo ML, Brotzman M et al (2012) Comparison of outcomes between laparoscopic vs robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a study of comparative effectiveness based upon validated quality of live outcomes. BJU Int 109(6):898–905PubMed

120.

Laviana AA, Hu JC (2013) A comparison of the robot-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy. Minerva Urol Nefrol 65(3):161–170PubMed

121.

Close A, Robertson C, Rushton S et al (2013) Comparative cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of men with localised prostate cancer: a health technology assessment from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Eur Urol 64(3):361–369PubMed

122.

Ramsey C, Pickard R, Robertson C et al (2012) Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer. Health Technol Assess 16(41):1–313

123.

Hyams ES, Mullins JK, Pierorazio PM et al (2013) Impact of robotic technique and surgical volume on the cost of radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 27(3):298–303PubMed

124.

Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs: the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363(8):701–704PubMed

125.

Delaney CP, Denagore AJ, Ponsky L (2010) Robot-assisted surgery and health care costs. N Engl J Med 363(22):2175 author reply 2176PubMed

126.

Van Dierendonck JH (2013) Prostatectomie met joysticks. Med Oncologie 3:19–21

127.

Ezekiel JE (2012) In medicine, falling for fake innovation. Column in The New York Times

128.

Levi M (2013) Exnovatie. Column in Medisch Contact

129.

Böhm B, Rötting N, Schwenk W et al (2001) A prospective randomized trial on heart rate variability of the surgical team during laparoscopic and conventional sigmoid resection. Arch Surg 136(3):305–310PubMed

130.

Arnetz BB, Andreasson S, Strandberg M et al (1988) Comparison between surgeons and general practitioners with respect to cardiovascular and psychosocial risk factors among physicians. Scan J Work Environ Health 14(2):118–124

131.

Van der Schatte ORH, Van’t Hullenaar CD, Ruurda JP et al (2009) Ergonomics, user comfort, and performance in standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 23(6):1365–1371

132.

Wolf JS Jr, Marcovich R, Gill IS et al (2000) Survey of neuromuscular injuries to the patient and surgeon during urologic laparoscopic surgery. Urology 55(6):831–836PubMed

133.

Hubert N, Gilles M, Desbrosses K et al (2013) Ergonomic assessment of the surgeon’s physical workload during standard and robot assisted laparoscopic procedures. Int J Med Robot 9(2):142–147PubMed

134.

Klein MI, Warm JS, Riley MA et al (2012) Mental workload and stress perceived by novice operators in the laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive surgical interfaces. J Endourol 26(8):1089–1094PubMed

135.

Heemskerk J, Zandbergen HR, Keet S et al. Relax! It’s just laparoscopy! Surgeon’s heart rhythm variability as a measure of mental strain during robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Submitted

136.

Shukla PJ, Scherr DS, Milsom JW (2010) Robot-assisted surgery and health care costs. N Engl J Med 363(22):2174 author reply 2176PubMed

137.

Awad MM, Fleshman JW (2010) Robot-assisted surgery and health care costs. N Engl J Med 363(22):2174–2175 author reply 2176PubMed

138.

Ibrahim AM, Makary MA (2010) Robot-assisted surgery and health care costs. N Engl J Med 363(22):2175–2176 author reply 2176PubMed

139.

La Chapelle CF, Jansen FW, Pelger RCM et al (2013) Robotchirurgie in Nederland. Hoogwaardig bewijs voor effectiviteit ontbreekt. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 157(28):A5145PubMed

140.

Van der Sluis PC, Schreuder HW, Merks BT et al (2013) Centralisatie van robotchirurgie. Betere resultaten en besparing van kosten. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 157(28):A5228PubMed

141.

Van der Poel HG, Beerlage HP, Klaver SO (2013) Robotchirurgie: pas op de plaats? Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 157(28):A6365PubMed

Titel: The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery
verfasst von: Jeroen Heemskerk
Nicole D. Bouvy
Cor G. M. I. Baeten
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2014
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3306-8

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Appendizitis | Nachrichten

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 | Operationsvorbereitung | Nachrichten

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

weitere anzeigen

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

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

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

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

Minimally invasive surgery for esophageal cancer: a review on sentinel node concept

The ergonomics of women in surgery

Automatic supervision of gestures to guide novice surgeons during training

Comparison of intravenous and intraperitoneal lignocaine for pain relief following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial

Safety and patient satisfaction of early diet after endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric epithelial neoplasia: a prospective, randomized study

Peroral endoscopic myotomy for idiopathic achalasia: randomized comparison of water-jet assisted versus conventional dissection technique

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

Update Chirurgie

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

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