Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Surgical Endoscopyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Surgical Endoscopy
Article . 2003 . Peer-reviewed
License: Springer TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures

Authors: S. Chapman; W.S. Melvin; Mark A. Talamini; Santiago Horgan;

A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures

Abstract

The Academic Robotics Group prospectively studied 211 robotically assisted operations to assess the safety and utility of robotically assisted surgery.All operations took place at one of four member institutions between June 2000 and June 2001 using the recently FDA-approved daVinci robotic system. A variety of procedures were undertaken, including antireflux surgery (69), cholecystectomy (36), Heller myotomy (26), bowel resection (17), donor nephrectomy (15), left internal mammery artery mobilization (14), gastric bypass (seven), splenectomy (seven), adrenalectomy (six), exploratory laparoscopy (three), pyloroplasty (four), gastrojejunostomy (two), distal pancreatectomy (one), duodenal polypectomy (one), esophagectomy (one), gastric mass resection (one), and lysis of adhesions (one).Average operating room time was 188 min (range 45 to 387, SD = 83), surgical time 143 min (range 35 to 462, SD = 63), and robot time 90 min (range 12 to 235, SD = 47). Median length of stay was 1 day (range 0 to 37). There were 8 (4%) technical complications during procedures, five minor (four hook cautery dislodgement, one slipped robotic trocar) and three major (system malfunctions, two of which required conversion to standard laparoscopy). In all cases, technical problems caused only delay, without apparent altered outcome. There were medical/surgical complications in nine patients (4%). Six (3%) were considered major, including one death unrelated to the robotic procedure.The results of robotic-assisted surgery compare favorably with those of conventional laparoscopy with respect to mortality, complications, and length of stay. Robotic-assisted surgery is safe and effective and is a new reality for American surgery. The role of these devices in surgery will expand as the technology evolves.

Keywords

Postoperative Complications, Treatment Outcome, Surgery, Computer-Assisted, Humans, Prospective Studies, Robotics, Length of Stay, Nephrectomy, Digestive System Surgical Procedures, United States

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    281
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
281
Top 1%
Top 1%
Top 1%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!