Robotic low anterior resection for a distal sigmoid colon cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic- a video vignette.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kudsi OY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7436878 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Cooperation with multiple departments is essential for the treatment of patients with rectal cancer and other pelvic cancers. In our department, we experienced two cases of rectal cancer that underwent robotic low anterior resection (LAR) and simultaneous resection of other pelvic organs (case 1 with prostatectomy and case 2 with hysterectomy) using the da Vinci Xi system. Here, we show the precise procedures of these two robotic surgeries. Under general anesthesia and lithotomy position, five da Vinci ports were symmetrically placed along the umbilical horizontal line with a 7 cm interval, and a 5 mm AirSeal Access Port was added in the right or left upper quadrant. Patients were placed with 22-degree Trendelenburg and 8-degree tilt to the right. The operators used the center port on the umbilicus as a camera port and chose the docking arms with either two-left-one-right or one-left-two-right setting depending on their preference. This port setting was quite useful for the operators from multiple departments to change the docking arms, even if their preference may be different. Moreover, assistants could use the remaining two ports to provide a well-expanded and safer surgical field. "With a familiar view" and "with a wide view" are our two concepts to safely perform extended pelvic surgeries. We have employed this symmetrical horizontal port site position as a general setting for usual rectal surgeries.
| S-EPMC6744546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThis study evaluates the relationship of tumour and anatomical features with operative difficulty in robotic low anterior resection performed by four experienced surgeons in a high-volume colorectal cancer practice.MethodsData from 382 patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection by four expert surgeons between January 2016 and June 2019 were included in the analysis. Operating time was used as a measure of operative difficulty. Univariate and multivariate mixed models were used to identify associations between baseline characteristics and operating time, with surgeon as a random effect, thereby controlling for variability in surgeon speed and proficiency. In an exploratory analysis, operative difficulty was defined as conversion to laparotomy, a positive margin or an incomplete mesorectum.ResultsMedian operating time was 4.28 h (range 1.95-11.33 h) but varied by surgeon from 3.45 h (1.95-6.10 h) to 5.93 h (3.33-11.33 h) (P < 0.001). Predictors of longer operating time in multivariate analysis were male sex, higher body mass index, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, low tumour height, greater sacral height and larger mesorectal area at the S5 vertebral level. Conversion occurred in two cases (0.5%), and incomplete mesorectum and positive margins were found in nine (2.4%) and 19 (5.0%) patients, respectively. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy and larger pelvic outlet were the only characteristics associated with the exploratory measure of difficulty.ConclusionPredicting operative difficulty based on easy to identify, preoperative radiological and clinical variables is feasible in robotic anterior resection.
| S-EPMC9701150 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7405145 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10493612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPerineal hernias can be secondarily acquired following abdominoperineal resection of the rectum. While transabdominal minimally invasive techniques have traditionally used laparoscopy, there are few studies published on the robotic platform, which has been gaining popularity for other types of hernia repairs. We review the existing literature, share a video vignette, and provide practical tips for surgeons interested in adopting this approach.MethodsA literature search in Pubmed was performed to include all articles in English describing robotic repair of perineal hernias with identification of variables of interest related to repair. A case presentation with an accompanying video vignette and lessons learned from the experience are provided.ResultsSeven case reports (four containing video) published between 2019 and 2022 were included. Most articles (n = 5) utilized the Da Vinci Si or Xi, and most patients (n = 5) had undergone abdominoperineal resection with neoadjuvant chemotherapy to treat rectal cancer. Patients were positioned in Trendelenburg with rightward tilt (n = 2), modified lithotomy (n = 1), or a combination of the two (n = 1). All articles (n = 7) reported closing the defect and using mesh. Three articles describe placing five ports (one camera, three robotic, one assistant). There were no significant intraoperative or postoperative complications reported, and no recurrence noted at 3-27 months follow-up. Based on our experience, as shown in the video vignette, we recommend lithotomy positioning, using porous polypropylene mesh anchored to the periosteum of the sacrum and peritoneum overlying the bladder and side wall, and placing a drain above the mesh.ConclusionsA robotic transabdominal approach to perineal hernia repair is a viable alternate to laparoscopy based on low complication rates and lack of recurrence. Prospective and longer duration data are needed to compare the techniques.
| S-EPMC10017789 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9314020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim was to develop and operationally define 'performance metrics' that characterize a reference approach to robotic-assisted low anterior resection (RA-LAR) and to obtain face and content validity through a consensus meeting.MethodThree senior colorectal surgeons with robotic experience and a senior behavioural scientist formed the Metrics Group. We used published guidelines, training materials, manufacturers' instructions and unedited videos of RA-LAR to deconstruct the operation into defined, measurable components - performance metrics (i.e. procedure phases, steps, errors and critical errors). The performance metrics were then subjected to detailed critique by 18 expert colorectal surgeons in a modified Delphi process.ResultsPerformance metrics for RA-LAR had 15 procedure phases, 128 steps, 89 errors and 117 critical errors in women, 88 errors and 118 critical errors in men. After the modified Delphi process the final performance metrics consisted of 14 procedure phases, 129 steps, 88 errors and 115 critical errors in women, 87 errors and 116 critical errors in men. After discussion by the Delphi panel, all procedure phases received unanimous consensus apart from phase I (patient positioning and preparation, 83%) and phase IV (docking, 94%).ConclusionA robotic rectal operation can be broken down into procedure phases, steps, with errors and critical errors, known as performance metrics. The face and content of these metrics have been validated by a large group of expert robotic colorectal surgeons from Europe. We consider the metrics essential for the development of a structured training curriculum and standardized procedural assessment for RA-LAR.
| S-EPMC7818231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Minimally invasive colorectal surgery is currently well-accepted, with open techniques being reserved for very difficult cases. Laparoscopic colectomy has been proven to have lower mortality, complication, and ostomy rates; a shorter median length of stay; and lower overall costs when compared to its open counterpart. This trend is seen in both benign and malignant indications. Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in colorectal surgery was first described in the early 1990s. Three recent meta-analyses comparing transabdominal extraction against NOSES concluded that NOSES was superior in terms of overall postoperative complications, recovery of gastrointestinal function, postoperative pain, aesthetics, and hospital stay. However, NOSES was associated with a longer operative time. Herein, we present our technique of robotic NOSES anterior resection using the da Vinci Xi platform in diverticular disease and sigmoid colon cancers.
| S-EPMC10781600 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRobot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) for intrathoracic pathology and especially for mediastinal mass resection has been increasingly accepted as an alternative method to open sternotomy and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). However, the utilization of this approach for complex and advanced in size cases needs more clinical evidence. We are presenting a series of 4 patients who had resection of >10 cm mediastinal masses via RATS.Cases descriptionThe mean age was 76.25±10.3 years and 3 were males (75%). All masses were positron emission tomography (PET) positive, and 1 patient had positive Acetyl-cholinesterase antibodies and myasthenia gravis (MG). All patients underwent RATS resection via DaVinci® X system. The dissections were conducted with spatula and/or Maryland bipolar forceps. In 2 cases, the resection was done with bilateral docking, and in 1 case, a drain was not inserted at the end. In 1 patient, pericardial resection was necessitated. All masses were thymomas with 1 dimension measured >10 cm on pathology. All patients were discharged on day 1 or 2 postoperatively with uneventful recoveries. There was no in-hospital, 30- or 90-day mortality. All patients were found to be without issues on follow-up.ConclusionsThis report shows that RATS is safe and can be offered in the management of >10 cm anterior mediastinal masses. The previous size limit of the tumor for minimally invasive and especially RATS approach of 5 cm should be challenged.
| S-EPMC10493617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the use of binary metric-based (proficiency-based progression; PBP) performance assessments and global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS) of a robotic-assisted low anterior rectal resection (RA-LAR) procedure.MethodA prospective study of video analysis of RA-LAR procedures was carried out using the PBP metrics with binary parameters previously developed, and GEARS. Recordings were collected from five novice surgeons (≤30 RA-LAR previously performed) and seven experienced surgeons (>30 RA-LAR previously performed). Two consultant colorectal surgeons were trained to be assessors in the use of PBP binary parameters to evaluate the procedure phases, surgical steps, errors, and critical errors in male and female patients and GEARS scores. Novice and experienced surgeons were categorized and assessed using PBP metrics and GEARS; mean scores obtained were compared for statistical purpose. Also, the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of these assessment tools was evaluated.ResultsTwenty unedited recordings of RA-LAR procedures were blindly assessed. Overall, using PBP metric-based assessment, a subgroup of experienced surgeons made more errors (20 versus 16, P = 0.158) and critical errors (9.2 versus 7.8, P = 0.417) than the novice group, although not significantly. However, during the critical phase of RA-LAR, experienced surgeons made significantly fewer errors than the novice group (95% CI of the difference, Lower = 0.104 - Upper = 5.155, df = 11.9, t = 2.23, p = 0.042), and a similar pattern was observed for critical errors. The PBP metric and GEARS assessment tools distinguished between the objectively assessed performance of experienced and novice colorectal surgeons performing RA-LAR (total error scores with PBP metrics, P = 0.019-0.008; GEARS scores, P = 0.029-0.025). GEARS demonstrated poor IRR (mean IRR 0.49) and weaker discrimination between groups (15-41 per cent difference). PBP binary metrics demonstrated good IRR (mean 0.94) and robust discrimination particularly for total error scores (58-64 per cent).ConclusionsPBP binary metrics seem to be useful for metric-based training for surgeons learning RA-LAR procedures.
| S-EPMC9092445 | biostudies-literature