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
. 2025 Jun;55(6):746-753.
doi: 10.1007/s00595-024-02975-y. Epub 2024 Dec 9.

A prospective study on the enhancement of surgical safety in robotic surgery: The BirdView camera system

Yusuke Ogi  1 , Taro Oshikiri  2 , Hiroyuki Egi  3 , Kei Ishimaru  2 , Shigehiro Koga  2 , Motohira Yoshida  2 , Satoshi Kikuchi  2 , Satoshi Akita  2 , Hironori Matsumoto  2 , Hiroki Sugishita  2
Affiliations

A prospective study on the enhancement of surgical safety in robotic surgery: The BirdView camera system

Yusuke Ogi et al. Surg Today. 2025 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the surgical safety and benefits of using the BirdView camera system with a wide field of view in robotic surgery for rectal cancer in a prospective clinical study.

Methods: This study included 20 consecutive patients who underwent robotic surgery at our institution between the years 2022 and 2023. The primary endpoint was perioperative safety, which was defined as the occurrence of adverse events, including other organ injuries and malfunctions, caused by the BirdView camera system.

Results: There were no injuries to any other organs caused by the console surgeon or assistant forceps during surgery. Surgical adverse events occurred in five cases (atelectasis, paralytic ileus, and anastomotic leakage) during the postoperative course. There were no cases of device failure or damage to the surrounding organs, including peritoneal heat damage.

Conclusions: We believe that the BirdView system could be valuable in improving the safety of robotic surgery by enabling the observation of blind spots, thus preventing harm to other organs.

Keywords: Other organ injury; Robotic surgery; Wide-view camera.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, et al. Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open d3 dissection for stage ii/iii colon cancer: japan clinical oncology group study JCOG 0404. Ann Surg. 2014;260(1):23–30. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–32. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–26. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ. Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2004;91(9):1111–24. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Khajeh E, Aminizadeh E, Dooghaie Moghadam A, Nikbakhsh R, Goncalves G, Carvalho C, et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted surgery in rectal cancer compared with open and laparoscopic surgery. Cancers (Basel). 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15030839 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC

LinkOut - more resources