Abstract

In the last two decades, robotic-assisted approaches have gained popularity as alternatives to conventional open and minimal-invasive surgery (MIS). The robotic approach combines the concepts of the traditional MIS with the latest technological advancements, enabling the surgeon to control the instrumentation using a robotic device connected to a remote console. With this approach, the surgeon obviates the known drawbacks of conventional MIS, such as the reduced in-depth perception and hand-eye coordination. Since its introduction, numerous robotic-assisted procedures have been developed and tested across nearly all surgical fields. Data from previous studies have shown that a great majority of these techniques are feasible and have favourable treatment outcomes. In the field of thoracic and vascular surgery, two disciplines often combined in Belgium, robotic approaches have been implemented in the treatment of a wide array of disorders including lung cancer, mediastinal tumours, thoracic outlet syndrome, diaphragmatic paralysis, sympathectomy, aortobifemoral bypass surgery and division of the arcuate ligament for median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS). Despite this increasing popularity, there are still a number of controversies regarding robotic surgery. There are only limited data on the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery and its objective proven benefit over conventional MIS. In this review, we summarise the latest data on robotic approaches for the most relevant thoracic and vascular disorders.

Highlights

  • The advent of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has clearly changed the landscape for surgical practice worldwide

  • The authors concluded that robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) was a safe approach and even resulted in higher lymph node sampling rates and fewer postoperative complications compared to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) [31]

  • The authors concluded that RATS and VATS are both feasible techniques for early-stage thymomas with similar oncological outcomes compared to open surgery

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The advent of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has clearly changed the landscape for surgical practice worldwide. For the majority of these procedures, studies have shown that the minimal-invasive approach results in fewer complications, reduced hospital stays, and faster return to normal functions compared to their respective open approach [2, 3] Despite these clear advantages of MIS, there are a number of drawbacks as well. These benefits have mainly been shown in the field of mediastinal tumours and lung cancer surgery, the efficacy of robotic-assisted surgery has been proven for other thoracic and vascular procedures such as first-rib resection, sympathectomy, diaphragmatic paralysis, median arcuate ligament release, and aorto/ilio-femoral bypass surgery for occlusive disease [4, 9] Despite these advantages and the increasing popularity of these robotic-assisted approaches, there are still controversies regarding the implementation and the use of these approaches, such as the generally high operating costs, lack of haptic feedback, the size of the system, and longer total operative times due to installation of the robotic system [7, 10]. We summarise the latest data on surgical techniques and treatment outcomes for robotic-assisted thoracic and vascular surgery

Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery
Lung cancer surgery
Mediastinal masses
First rib resection
Sympathectomy
Diaphragmatic plication
Robotic-assisted vascular surgery
Median arcuate ligament release
Vascular bypass surgery
Aortic aneurysm surgery
Costs of robotic surgery
Ergonomics of robotic surgery
Future of robotic surgery
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call