Robotic single port surgery: Current status and future considerations
- PMID: 25097321
- PMCID: PMC4120222
- DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.128504
Robotic single port surgery: Current status and future considerations
Abstract
Introduction and objectives: It has been established that robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared with standard laparoscopic surgery. Optics, ergonomics, dexterity and precision are all enhanced with the use of a robotic platform. For these reasons, it was postulated that the application of robotics to laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) could overcome some of the constraints seen with the conventional laparoscopic approach. Issues such as instrument clashing, inability to achieve effective triangulation for dissection and difficulties with intracorporeal suturing have limited the widespread adoption of conventional LESS. The application of robotics has eliminated many of the constraints experienced with conventional LESS; however, challenges still remain.
Materials and methods: A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed to identify relevant studies. There were no time restrictions applied to the search, but only studies in English were included. We used the following search terms: Robotic single site surgery, robotic single port surgery, robotic single incision surgery and robotic laparoendoscopic single site surgery.
Results: A number of centers have published their experience with robotic-laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (R-LESS); however, no prospective studies exist. What is clear is that R-LESS minimizes several of the difficulties experienced with conventional LESS, including intracorporeal suturing and triangulation during dissection. Outcomes are comparable to standard robotic surgery, with a trend toward improved cosmesis and reduced pain. However, a significant advantage with regard to these two factors has yet to be demonstrated.
Conclusions: R-LESS is technically feasible and the benefits of robotic surgery eliminate many of the challenges seen with conventional LESS. However, despite the advantages of the robotic platform, R-LESS is not free of challenges. Instrument clashing remains an issue due to the bulky profile of the current robotic system. Other issues include lack of space for the assistant at the bedside, inability to incorporate the 4(th) robotic arm for retraction and difficulties with triangulation. Although solutions for some of these issues are currently under development, R-LESS is still very much in its infancy.
Keywords: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery; robotics; single port surgery.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
Similar articles
-
Current status of robotic single-port surgery.Urol Ann. 2017 Jul-Sep;9(3):217-222. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_51_17. Urol Ann. 2017. PMID: 28794585 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic approaches to the ureter: Pyeloplasty and ureteral reimplantation.Indian J Urol. 2014 Jul;30(3):293-9. doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.128503. Indian J Urol. 2014. PMID: 25097316 Free PMC article.
-
Robotic Single-port Surgery: Paving the Way for the Future.Urology. 2016 Sep;95:5-10. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.05.013. Epub 2016 May 17. Urology. 2016. PMID: 27211930 Review.
-
Perioperative comparison of robotic assisted laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) pyeloplasty versus conventional LESS pyeloplasty.Eur Urol. 2012 Feb;61(2):410-4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.024. Epub 2011 Oct 24. Eur Urol. 2012. PMID: 22036645
-
Current status of laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urologic surgery.Korean J Urol. 2012 Jul;53(7):443-50. doi: 10.4111/kju.2012.53.7.443. Epub 2012 Jul 19. Korean J Urol. 2012. PMID: 22866213 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Current status of robotic single-port surgery.Urol Ann. 2017 Jul-Sep;9(3):217-222. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_51_17. Urol Ann. 2017. PMID: 28794585 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Novel Technologies in Urologic Surgery: a Rapidly Changing Scenario.Curr Urol Rep. 2016 Mar;17(3):19. doi: 10.1007/s11934-016-0577-3. Curr Urol Rep. 2016. PMID: 26874531 Review.
-
What is next in robotic urology?Curr Urol Rep. 2014 Dec;15(12):460. doi: 10.1007/s11934-014-0460-z. Curr Urol Rep. 2014. PMID: 25341557 Review.
References
-
- Hirano D, Minei S, Yamaguchi K, Yoshikawa T, Hachiya T, Yoshida T, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy for adrenal tumors via a single large port. J Endourol. 2005;19:788–92. - PubMed
-
- Raman JD, Bensalah K, Bagrodia A, Stern JM, Cadeddu JA. Laboratory and clinical development of single keyhole umbilical nephrectomy. Urology. 2007;70:1039–42. - PubMed
-
- Autorino R, Stein RJ, Lima E, Damiano R, Khanna R, Haber GP, et al. Current status and future perspectives in laparoendoscopic single-site and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic urological surgery. Int J Urol. 2010;17:410–31. - PubMed
-
- Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, Crouzet S, Desai MM, Gill IS. Single port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72:1190–3. - PubMed
-
- Raman JD, Bagrodia A, Cadeddu JA. Single-incision, umbilical laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic nephrectomy: A comparison of perioperative outcomes and short-term measures of convalescence. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1198–206. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources