Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 May 6;11(9):2612.
doi: 10.3390/jcm11092612.

Port Placement Strategies for Robotic Pulmonary Lobectomy: A Narrative Review

Affiliations
Review

Port Placement Strategies for Robotic Pulmonary Lobectomy: A Narrative Review

Sara Parini et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background: Despite the use of robotics becoming increasingly popular among thoracic surgeons worldwide, there remains debate over the best robotic approach for lung resections. In this paper, we delineated the main port placement strategies and discussed their advantages and disadvantages.

Methods: A PubMed literature review was performed using key phrases such as "robotic lobectomy technique", "RATS lobectomy", and "port placement robotic lobectomy". After the final review, 22 articles were included as references, of which 10 described common robotic port mapping techniques.

Results: Several port strategies for robot-assisted pulmonary lobectomies have been proposed and described in the literature, each showing its own limitations and advantages.

Conclusions: New robotic surgeons may choose their port strategy according to personal preference and previous surgical experience, especially regarding open or VATS resections. Robust data comparing different port placements in robotic surgery are lacking. Further research should be directed toward comparisons of clinical outcomes with different robotic approaches.

Keywords: RATS; port mapping; robotic approach; robotic lobectomy; robotic surgery; surgical technique.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart summarizing the selection of included articles.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Port mapping of 3-port RATS. (a) robotic left arm; (b) utility incision; (c) camera port.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Port mapping of 4-port RATS. (a) robotic left arm 1 (lung retraction); (b) robotic left arm 2; (c) camera port; (d) utility port.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Port mapping of biportal RATS. (a) robotic left arm; (b) utility and camera port.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Port mapping of 4-port completely portal robotic lobectomy. (a) Robotic left arm 1 (lung retraction); (b) robotic left arm 2; (c) camera port; (d) assistant port; (e) robotic right arm.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Port mapping of 4-port completely portal robotic lobectomy. (a) Robotic left arm 1 (lung retraction); (b) robotic left arm 2; (c) camera port; (d) assistant port; (e) robotic right arm.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cerfolio R.J. Total Port Approach for Robotic Lobectomy. Thorac. Surg. Clin. 2014;24:151–156. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2014.02.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Soliman B.G., Nguyen D.T., Chan E.Y., Chihara R.K., Meisenbach L.M., Graviss E.A., Kim M.P. Impact of da Vinci Xi robot in pulmonary resection. J. Thorac. Dis. 2020;12:3561–3572. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-720. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Melfi F.M., Menconi G.F., Mariani A.M., Angeletti C.A. Early experience with robotic technology for thoracoscopic surgery. Eur. J. Cardio-Thorac. Surg. 2002;21:864–868. doi: 10.1016/S1010-7940(02)00102-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zirafa C.C., Romano G., Key T.H., Davini F., Melfi F. The evolution of robotic thoracic surgery. Ann. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2019;8:210–217. doi: 10.21037/acs.2019.03.03. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Park B.J., Flores R.M., Rusch V. Robotic assistance for video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy: Technique and initial results. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2006;131:54–59. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.07.031. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources