Implementation of robotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a university hospital.

BACKGROUND: Robot surgery is a further step towards new potential developments in minimally invasive surgery. Surgeons must keep abreast of these new technologies and learn their limits and possibilities. Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy has not yet been performed in our institution. The purpose of this report is to present the pathway of implementation of robotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a university hospital. METHODS: The Zeus(R) robot system was used. Experimental training was performed on animals. The results of our experimental training allowed us to perform our first two clinical cases. RESULTS: Robot arm set-up and trocar placement required 53 and 35 minutes. Operative time were 59 and 45 minutes respectively. The overall operative time was 112 and 80 minutes, respectively. There were no intraoperative complications. Patients were discharged from the hospital after an overnight stay. CONCLUSION: Robotic laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and patient recovery similar to those of standard laparoscopy. At present, there are no advantages of robotic over conventional surgery. Nevertheless, robots have the potential to revolutionise the way surgery is performed. Robot surgery is not reserved for a happy few. This technology deserves more attention because it has the potential to change the way surgery is performed.

Robotic, fluoroscopic or EMG assisted pedicle screw insertion. A CT based comparative study

Introduction: In order to improve safety of pedicle screw placement several techniques have been developed. More recently robotically assisted pedicle insertion has been introduced aiming at increasing accuracy. The aim of this study was to compare this new technique with the two main pedicle insertion techniques in our unit namely fluoroscopically assisted vs EMG aided insertion. Material and methods: A total of 382 screws (78 thoracic,304 lumbar) were introduced in 64 patients (m/f = 1.37, equally distributed between insertion technique groups) by a single experienced spinal surgeon. From those, 64 (10 thoracic, 54 lumbar) were introduced in 11 patients using a miniature robotic device based on pre operative CT images under fluoroscopic control. 142 (4 thoracic, 138 lumbar) screws were introduced using lateral fluoroscopy in 27 patients while 176 (64 thoracic, 112 lumbar) screws in 26 patients were inserted using both fluoroscopy and EMG monitoring. There was no difference in the distribution of scoliotic spines between the 3 groups (n = 13). Screw position was assessed by an independent observer on CTs in axial, sagittal and coronal planes using the Rampersaud A to D classification. Data of lumbar and thoracic screws were processed separately as well as data obtained from axial, sagittal and coronal CT planes. Results: Intra- and interobserver reliability of the Rampersaud classification was moderate, (0.35 and 0.45 respectively) being the least good on axial plane. The total number of misplaced screws (C&D grades) was generally low (12 thoracic and 12 lumbar screws). Misplacement rates were same in straight and scoliotic spines. The only difference in misplacement rates was observed on axial and coronal images in the EMG assisted thoracic screw group with a higher proportion of C or D grades (p <0.05) in that group. Recorded compound muscle action potentials (CMAP) values of the inserted screws were 30.4 mA for the robot and 24.9mA for the freehand technique with a CI of 3.8 of the mean difference of 5.5 mA. Discussion: Robotic placement did improve the placement of thoracic screws but not that of lumbar screws possibly because our misplacement rates in general near that of published navigation series. Robotically assisted spine surgery might therefore enhance the safety of screw placement in particular in training settings were different users at various stages of their learning curve are involved in pedicle instrumentation.

Pedicle screw insertion: robotic assistance versus conventional C-arm fluoroscopy.

Bone-mounted robotic guidance for pedicle screw placement has been recently introduced, aiming at increasing accuracy. The aim of this prospective study was to compare this novel approach with the conventional fluoroscopy assisted freehand technique (not the two- or three-dimensional fluoroscopy-based navigation). Two groups were compared: 11 patients, constituting the robotical group, were instrumented with 64 pedicle screws; 23 other patients, constituting the fluoroscopic group, were also instrumented with 64 pedicle screws. Screw position was assessed by two independent observers on postoperative CT-scans using the Rampersaud A to D classification. No neurological complications were noted. Grade A (totally within pedicle margins) accounted for 79% of the screws in the robotically assisted and for 83% of the screws in the fluoroscopic group respectively (p = 0.8). Grade C and D screws, considered as misplacements, accounted for 4.7% of all robotically inserted screws and 7.8% of the fluoroscopically inserted screws (p = 0.71). The current study did not allow to state that robotically assisted screw placement supersedes the conventional fluoroscopy assisted technique, although the literature is more optimistic about the former.

Organometallic cages as vehicles for intracellular release of photosensitizers.

Water-soluble metalla-cages were used to deliver hydrophobic porphin molecules to cancer cells. After internalization, the photosensitizer was photoactivated, significantly increasing the cytotoxicity in cells. During the transport, the photosensitizer remains nonreactive to light, offering a new strategy to tackle overall photosensitization, a limitation often encountered in photodynamic therapy.

Robotic Gait Training Is not Superior to Conventional Treadmill Training in Parkinson Disease: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of robots for gait training in Parkinson disease (PD) is growing, but no evidence points to an advantage over the standard treadmill. METHODS: In this randomized, single-blind controlled trial, participants aged <75 years with early-stage PD (Hoehn-Yahr <3) were randomly allocated to 2 groups: either 30 minutes of gait training on a treadmill or in the Lokomat for 3 d/wk for 4 weeks. Patients were evaluated by a physical therapist blinded to allocation before and at the end of treatment and then at the 3- and 6-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the 6-minute walk test. RESULTS: Of 334 screened patients, the authors randomly allocated 30 to receive gait training with treadmill or the Lokomat. At baseline, the 2 groups did not differ. At the 6-month follow-up, both groups had improved significantly in the primary outcome measure (treadmill: mean = 490.95 m, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 448.56-533.34, P = .0006; Lokomat: 458.6 m, 95% CI = 417.23-499.96, P = .01), but no significant differences were found between the 2 groups (P = .53). DISCUSSION: Robotic gait training with the Lokomat is not superior to treadmill training in improving gait performance in patients with PD. Both approaches are safe, with results maintained for up to 6 months.

Applications de la chirurgie robotique transorale dans les tumeurs de la sphère ORL [The role of transoral robotic surgery in head and neck cancer].

Since 2000 and the commercialisation of the Da Vinci robotic system, indications for robotic surgery are rapidly increasing. Recent publications proved superior functional outcomes with equal oncologic safety in comparison to conventional open surgery. Its field of application may extend to the nasopharynx and skull base surgery. The preliminary results are encouraging. This article reviews the current literature on the role of transoral robotic surgery in head and neck cancer.

Robotic-Assisted Surgery Improves the Quality of Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer Compared to Laparoscopy: Results of a Case-Controlled Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of a robotic surgical system is claimed to allow precise traction and counter-traction, especially in a narrow pelvis. Whether this translates to improvement of the quality of the resected specimen is not yet clear. The aim of the study was to compare the quality of the TME and the short-term oncological outcome between robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer resections. METHODS: 20 consecutive robotic TME performed in a single institution for rectal cancer (Rob group) were matched 1:2 to 40 laparoscopic resections (Lap group) for gender, body mass index (BMI), and distance from anal verge on rigid proctoscopy. The quality of TME was assessed by 2 blinded and independent pathologists and reported according to international standardized guidelines. RESULTS: Both samples were well matched for gender, BMI (median 25.9 vs. 24.2 kg/m(2), p = 0.24), and level of the tumor (4.1 vs. 4.8 cm, p = 0.20). The quality of the TME was better in the Robotic group (complete TME: 95 vs. 55 %; p = 0.0003, nearly complete TME 5 vs. 37 %; p = 0.04, incomplete TME 0 vs. 8 %, p = 0.09). A trend for lower positive circumferential margin was observed in the Robotic group (10 vs. 25 %, p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that robotic-assisted surgery improves the quality of TME for rectal cancer. Whether this translates to better oncological outcome needs to be further investigated.