Robotic surgery: new robots and finally some real competition!

PURPOSE: For the last 20 years, the predominant robot used in laparoscopic surgery has been Da Vinci by Intuitive Surgical. This monopoly situation has led to rising costs and relatively slow innovation. This article aims to discuss the two new robotic devices for laparoscopic surgery which have received regulatory approval for human use in different parts of the world. MATERIALS: A short description of the Senhance Surgical Robotic System and the REVO-I Robot Platform and their pros and cons compared to the Da Vinci system is presented. A discussion about the differences between the three robotic systems now in the market is presented, as well as a short review of the present state of robotic assistance in surgery and where we are headed.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery - current status and controversies.

Scarless surgery is the Holy Grail of surgery and the very raison d'etre of Minimal Access Surgery was the reduction of scars and thereby pain and suffering of the patients. The work of Muhe and Mouret in the late 80s, paved the way for mainstream laparoscopic procedures and it rapidly became the method of choice for many intra-abdominal procedures. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a very exciting new modality in the field of minimal access surgery which works for further reducing the scars of standard laparoscopy and towards scarless surgery. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) was developed for scarless surgery, but did not gain popularity due to a variety of reasons. NOTES stands for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery, a term coined by a consortium in 2005. NOTES remains a research technique with only a few clinical cases having been reported. The lack of success of NOTES seems to have spurred on the interest in single-incision laparoscopy as an eminently doable technique in the present with minimum visible scarring, rendering a 'scarless' effect. Laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) is, a term coined by a multidisciplinary consortium in 2008 for single-incision laparoscopic surgery. These are complementary technologies with similar difficulties of access, lack of triangulation and inadequate instrumentation as of date. LESS seems to offer an advantage to surgeons with its familiar field of view and instruments similar to those used in conventional laparoscopy. LESS remains a evolving special technique used successfully in many a centre, but with a significant way to go before it becomes mainstream. It currently stands between standard laparoscopy and NOTES in the armamentarium of minimal access surgery. This article outlines the development of LESS giving an overview of all the techniques and devices available and likely to be available in the future.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: initial hundred patients.

OBJECTIVES: To report our initial experience with laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery in 100 patients in urology. METHODS: Between October 2007 and December 2008, we performed LESS urologic procedures in 100 patients for various indications. These included nephrectomy (N = 34; simple 14, radical 3, donor 17), nephroureterectomy (N = 2), partial nephrectomy (N = 6), pyeloplasty (N = 17), transvesical simple prostatectomy (N = 32), and others (N = 9). Data were prospectively collected in a database approved by the Institutional Review Board. All procedures were performed using a novel single-port device (r-Port) and a varying combination of standard and specialized bent/articulating laparoscopic instruments. Robotic assistance was used to perform LESS pyeloplasty (N = 2) and simple prostatectomy (N = 1). In addition to standard perioperative data, we obtained data on postdischarge analgesia requirements, time to complete convalescence, and time to return to work. RESULTS: In the study period, LESS procedures accounted for 15% of all laparoscopic cases by the authors for similar indications. Conversion to standard multiport laparoscopy was necessary in 3 cases, addition of a single 5-mm port was necessary in 3 cases, and conversion to open surgery was necessary in 4 cases. On death occurred following simple prostatectomy in a Jehovah's Witness due to patient refusal to accept transfusion following hemorrhage. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in 5 and 9 cases, respectively. Mean operative time was 145, 230, 236, and 113 minutes and hospital stay was 2, 2.9, 2, and 3 days for simple nephrectomy, donor nephrectomy, pyeloplasty, and simple prostatectomy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LESS surgery is technically feasible for a variety of ablative and reconstructive applications in urology. With proper patient selection, conversion and complications rates are low. Improvement in instrumentation and technology is likely to expand the role of LESS in minimally invasive urology.

Laparoendoscopic single site surgery in urology.

Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) surgery is a recently coined term that refers to a group of techniques that perform laparoscopic intervention through a single abdominal incision often hidden within the umbilicus. The relative ease and swiftness of early success of LESS surgery is in large part because of the familiarity of current practitioners with advanced laparoscopic techniques and the advent of several technologic advances in the areas of instrumentation, camera systems, and access devices. As ongoing advancements in instrumentation and future robotics platforms are incorporated, the scope and application of LESS surgery is likely to expand. Ultimately, prospective studies that compare the safety and effectiveness of this new approach with the standard conventional laparoscopic approach will determine the future role in surgical practice.

Embryonic natural orifice transumbilical endoscopic surgery (E-NOTES) for advanced reconstruction: initial experience.

OBJECTIVES: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery comprises intraabdominal surgery performed by way of natural orifices (ie, vagina, mouth). In a similar manner, the umbilicus provides an embryonic natural orifice that permits intraabdominal access. We report on the feasibility of performing single-port advanced laparoscopic reconstructive surgery by way of the umbilicus in 6 patients. We propose the terminology embryonic-natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (E-NOTES) for this novel surgical approach. METHODS: Through a single 1.5- to 3-cm intraumbilical incision and a novel, single-access port, we performed laparoscopic bilateral single-session Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty (2 patients, 4 procedures), ileal ureter (n = 1), and ureteroneocystostomy with a psoas hitch (n = 1). No extraumbilical skin incisions were used. A 2-mm Veress needle port, inserted through a skin needle puncture, was used to create the pneumoperitoneum and to selectively insert a needlescopic grasper to assist in suturing. RESULTS: All procedures were successful without the need for any additional laparoscopic ports. For the 2 patients undergoing bilateral pyeloplasty (including patient repositioning) and the 1 patient each undergoing ileal ureter and psoas-hitch ureteroneocystostomy, the operating time was 4.5, 6, 5, and 3 hours, blood loss was 100, 50, 75, and 50 mL, and the hospital stay was 1, 2, 3, and 2 days, respectively. No intraoperative or postoperative complications developed. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, we present the initial experience with advanced laparoscopic reconstruction through a single intraumbilical port. Additional refinement of this technology could lead to wider incorporation of single-port laparoscopy in clinical practice. Embryonic-natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery appears to be a promising new approach for select indications.

The feasibility of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study of 20 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the gold standard for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Traditionally done through four ports, three and two port surgeries have been described. We present a novel technique of single port cholecystectomy using the R-Port (Advanced Surgical Concepts). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The R-Port is a Tri-port that allows the ingress of three 5 mm instruments through a single port. Twenty patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were subjected to single port cholecystectomy using the R-Port through the umbilicus. Two patients also had choledocholithiasis. Modified instruments with angulated shafts were used for the surgery. A telescope with a coaxial light cable was also used. Whenever necessary, an extra needle for retraction or an additional 5 mm port was used. RESULTS: Single port laparoscopic was accomplished in 17 of the 20 patients. In one patient an additional port was used for the cholecystectomy and in two others it was used for the common bile duct exploration but not for the dissection of Calot's triangle. Of the 17 patients, seven needed a single needle to retract the fundus of the gall bladder. CONCLUSIONS: Single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy is feasible and safe using the R-Port. The level of difficulty is higher and a needle for retraction or an additional port may be used whenever the visualization of Calot's triangle is unsatisfactory. Further studies and the development of better instrumentation are necessary before this can be recommended as a standard procedure.

Scarless single port transumbilical nephrectomy and pyeloplasty: first clinical report.

OBJECTIVE: To report the initial clinical cases of scarless, single port, transumbilical nephrectomy and pyeloplasty. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One patient each underwent single port transumbilical nephrectomy and pyeloplasty using the R-Port (Advanced Surgical Concepts), inserted through a transumbilical incision in both cases. Novel, specialized instruments, curved at the shaft, were used in addition to standard laparoscopic instrumentation. During pyeloplasty, a 2-mm needle-port (MiniSite, USSC, Norfolk, CT, USA) was also inserted, with no skin incision, to facilitate suturing. RESULTS: Both procedures were technically successful with no extra-umbilical skin incisions. The total operative duration was 3.4 and 2.7 h, the estimated blood loss 100 and 50 mL, and the hospital stay was 1 and 2 days for the nephrectomy and pyeloplasty, respectively. There were no complications during or after surgery. The total analgesia requirement was 100 and 150 mg of keterolac, and visual analogue pain scores were 8/10 and 2/10 at 1 and 2 days after surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Transumbilical, single port nephrectomy and pyeloplasty are technically feasible. The first initial clinical experience of organ-ablative and reconstructive renal surgery with this approach is reported.