Transoral Robotic Surgical Proficiency Via Real-Time Tactile Collision Awareness System
- PMID: 32865822
- DOI: 10.1002/lary.29034
Transoral Robotic Surgical Proficiency Via Real-Time Tactile Collision Awareness System
Abstract
Objectives: In 2009, the Food and Drug Administration approved the use of the surgical robotic system for removal of benign and malignant conditions of the upper aerodigestive tract. This novel application of robotic-assisted surgery, termed transoral robotic surgery (TORS), places robotic instruments and camera system through the mouth to reach recessed areas of the pharynx and larynx. Over the successive decade, there was a rapid adoption of TORS with a surgical growth rate that continues to increase. Despite the rapid clinical acceptance, the field of TORS has not yet seen substantive changes or advances in the technical shortcomings, the lack of which has restricted objective TORS-specific surgical skills assessment as well as subsequent skills improvement efforts. One of the primary technical challenges of TORS is operating in a confined space, where the robotic system is maneuvered within the restrictive boundaries of the mouth and throat. Due to these confined boundaries of the pharynx, instruments can frequently collide with anatomic structures such as teeth and bone, producing anatomic collisions. Therefore, we hypothesized that anatomic collisions negatively impact TORS surgical performance. Secondarily, we hypothesized that avoidance of unwanted anatomic collisions could improve TORS surgical proficiency.
Methods: Design and fidelity testing for a custom TORS training platform with an integrated anatomic collision-sensing system providing real-time tactile feedback is described. Following successful platform assembly and testing, validation study using the platform was carried through prospective surgical training with trial randomization. Twenty otolaryngology-head and neck surgery residents, each trainee performing three discrete mock surgical trials (n = 60), performed the initial system validation. Ten of the 20 residents were randomized to perform the surgical trials utilizing the real-time feedback system. The remaining 10 residents were randomized to perform the surgical trials without the feedback system, although the system still could record collision data. Surgical proficiency was measured by Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) score, time to completion, and tumor resection scores (categorical scale ranging 0-3, describing the adequacy of resection).
Results: Major anatomic collisions (greater than 5N of force) negatively affected GEARS robotic skills. A mixed model analysis demonstrated that for every additional occurrence of a major collision, GEARS robotic skills assessment score would decrease by 0.29 points (P = .04). Real-time collision awareness created significantly fewer major (> 5 N) anatomic collisions with the tactile feedback system active (n = 30, mean collisions = 2.9 ± 4.2) as compared with trials without tactile feedback (n = 30, mean collisions = 12.53 ± 23.23) (P < .001). The second assessment measure of time to completion was unaffected by the presence of collisions or by the use of tactile feedback system. The third proficiency assessment was measured with tumor resection grading. Tumor resection scores was significantly (P = .02) improved with collision awareness system activated than trials without collision awareness.
Conclusion: In order to test our primary hypothesis, a novel TORS training platform was successfully developed that provides collision force measurements including frequency, severity, and duration of anatomic collisions. Additionally, the platform was modulated to provide real-time tactile feedback of the occurrence of out-of-field collisions. Utilizing this custom platform, our hypothesis that anatomic collisions during TORS diminishes surgical performance was supported. Additionally, our secondary hypothesis that subsequent reduction of anatomic collisions improves TORS proficiency was supported by the surgical trial. Dedicated investigation to characterize the effect size and clinical impact is required in order to translate this finding into training curriculums and into clinical utilization.
Level of evidence: II (Randomized trial) Laryngoscope, 130:S1-S17, 2020.
Keywords: TORS; haptics; robotic surgery; surgical skill; training.
© 2020 American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society Inc, "The Triological Society" and American Laryngological Association (ALA).
Similar articles
-
Development of a Transoral Robotic Surgery Training Platform.Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2019 Jul;2019:5851-5854. doi: 10.1109/EMBC.2019.8856971. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2019. PMID: 31947182
-
Role of transoral robotic surgery in current head & neck practice.Surgeon. 2017 Jun;15(3):147-154. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2016.09.004. Epub 2016 Oct 11. Surgeon. 2017. PMID: 27742406 Review.
-
Evaluation of high-fidelity simulation as a training tool in transoral robotic surgery.Laryngoscope. 2017 Dec;127(12):2790-2795. doi: 10.1002/lary.26733. Epub 2017 Jun 28. Laryngoscope. 2017. PMID: 28657696
-
Intraoperative image guidance in transoral robotic surgery: A pilot study.Head Neck. 2017 Oct;39(10):1976-1983. doi: 10.1002/hed.24805. Epub 2017 Jul 28. Head Neck. 2017. PMID: 28755399
-
Complications of Transoral Robotic Surgery.Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2020 Dec;53(6):1109-1115. doi: 10.1016/j.otc.2020.07.017. Epub 2020 Sep 8. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2020. PMID: 32917420 Review.
Cited by
-
Remote teaching system for robotic surgery and its validation: results of a randomized controlled study.Surg Endosc. 2023 Dec;37(12):9190-9200. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10443-w. Epub 2023 Oct 16. Surg Endosc. 2023. PMID: 37845534 Clinical Trial.
-
The benefits of haptic feedback in robot assisted surgery and their moderators: a meta-analysis.Sci Rep. 2023 Nov 6;13(1):19215. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-46641-8. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37932393 Free PMC article.
-
Tactile Feedback in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Systematic Review.Int J Med Robot. 2024 Dec;20(6):e70019. doi: 10.1002/rcs.70019. Int J Med Robot. 2024. PMID: 39644216 Free PMC article.
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-
- Mack MJ. Minimally invasive and robotic surgery. JAMA 2001;285:568-572.
-
- Hanly EJ, Talamini MA. Robotic abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 2004;188:19S-26S.
-
- Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:3727-3736.
-
- Kent M, Wang T, Whyte R, Curran T, Flores R, Gangadharan S. Open, video-assisted thoracic surgery, and robotic lobectomy: review of a national database. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;97:236-242.
-
- Kelly K, Johnson-Obaseki S, Lumingu J, Corsten M. Oncologic, functional and surgical outcomes of primary transoral robotic surgery for early squamous cell cancer of the oropharynx: a systematic review. Oral Oncol 2014;50:696-703.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials