Robotic General Surgery Research Articles

Trends of robotic-assisted surgery for thyroid, colorectal, stomach and hepatopancreaticobiliary cancer: 10 year Korea trend investigation

BackgroundThe current position of robotic surgery in the field of minimally invasive surgery remains ambiguous. We evaluated long-term trends of robotic general surgery and the future direction of its development. MethodsData on robotic cancer surgeries between 2005 and 2014 were retrospectively collected by volunteer institutions in the Republic of Korea. Spearman's correlation and logistic regression analyses were used to compare robotic and laparoscopic surgery trends in general surgery. ResultsThe odds that robotic surgery was performed instead of laparoscopic surgery significantly decreased in the fields of colorectal, stomach, and hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery (odds ratio [OR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93–0.97; OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88–0.92; and OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.65–0.78, respectively), except for thyroid surgery (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.25–1.30). Of the total numbers of each procedure, proportions of robotic intersphincteric resections, abdominoperineal resections, and pylorus-preserving surgery performed significantly increased (r = 0.98, P < .001; r = 0.78, P = .01; and r = 0.86, P = .007, respectively). ConclusionsThe use of robotic surgery failed to preponderate that of laparoscopic surgery, except for thyroid surgery. Robotic surgery is increasingly preferred for limited fields or complex surgeries, but the use of robotics in simple surgeries has decreased.

Hospital factors strongly influence robotic use in general surgery

BackgroundWe hypothesized that general surgeons are more likely to use a robotic surgical platform at hospitals where more urologic and gynecologic robotic operations are performed, suggesting that hospital-related factors are important for choice of usage of minimally invasive platforms. MethodsWe queried the National Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2014 for patients who underwent stomach, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen, colon and rectum, or hernia (general surgery), prostate or kidney (urologic surgery), and ovarian or uterine surgery (gynecologic surgery). Hospitals were grouped into quartiles according to percent volume of robotic urologic or gynecologic operations. Multivariable logistic regression modeling determined independent variables associated with robotics. ResultsSurvey-weighted results represented 482,227 open, 240,360 laparoscopic, and 42,177 robotic general surgical operations at 3,933 hospitals. Robotics use increased with each year studied and was more likely to be performed on younger men with private insurance. The odds of a general surgery patient receiving a robotic operation increased with urologic and gynecologic use at the hospital. Patients at top quartile hospitals for robotic urologic surgery had 1.34 times greater odds of receiving robotic general surgery operations (confidence interval 1.15–1.57, P < .001) and 1.53 times greater odds (confidence interval 1.32–1.79, P < .001) at top quartile robotic gynecologic hospitals. These findings were independent of study year, surgical site, insurance type, and hospital type and persisted when only comparing laparoscopic to robotic procedures. ConclusionUse of robotics in general surgery is independently associated with use in urologic and gynecologic surgery at a hospital, suggesting that institutional factors are important drivers of use when considering laparoscopy versus robotics in general surgery.

A Standardized Robotic Training Curriculum in a General Surgery Program.

Background and Objectives:The general surgery residency at the University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria has a long tradition of integrating robotic surgery into training since 2002. The purpose of this paper is to investigate our curriculum and evaluation system, which was designed to achieve a standardized format for education in general robotic surgery.Methods:The curriculum consists of two phases: phase 1 (PGY 1–2): Complete 4 robotic surgery training modules; read two assigned robotic surgery articles; and practice simulation modules on the robot. phase 2 (PGY 3–5): Refresh training modules, score >90% on the simulator modules every 6 months; bedside assist minimum of 4 robotic procedures; and act as console surgeon for a minimum of 10 procedures with 2 separate attending surgeons. The required simulator modules were specially selected to incorporate all of the skills categories documented in the simulator. The faculty evaluate the resident's operative performance using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills validated rubric.Results:Since the curriculum was instituted in June 2017, 73 evaluations from 8 surgeons have been collected. We examined data from 6 residents who had at least 5 Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills assessments completed. Correlation coefficient scores showed a positive correlation ranging from 0.476 to 0.862 for average skills and 0.334 to 0.866 for overall performance scores.Discussion:The preliminary results suggest an improvement of resident robotic surgical skills through tailored education. This curriculum is designed to enhance robotic general surgery education that could potentially produce general surgeons able to operate robotically without needing a robotic/MIS (Minimally Invasive Surgery) fellowship.

Green indocyanine fluorescence in robotic abdominal surgery.

Fluorescent imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) is an emerging technology that is gaining acceptance for being a valid tool in surgeons' decision making. ICG binds to plasma lipoproteins if injected intravenously and, when excited by near-infrared light, provides anatomic information about organs vascularization and tissues perfusion. If injected in tissues, it migrates in the lymphatic system, therefore enabling the identification of lymphatic draining pathways of different organs. In this paper we address specific applications of ICG fluorescence in robotic general surgery.

Evolution and literature review of robotic general surgery resident training 2002-2018.

The University of Illinois purchased their first da Vinci System in September of 2002. Within the first calendar year, their program began orienting trainees to the da Vinci Standard System to make its inclusion in their clinical training run more smoothly. During the ensuring 16years, their program has evolved into more frequent resident orientations, lectures, and courses. The program has grown over the course of different versions of the da Vinci System. Currently, their program houses three Xi and two Si systems. Led by Dr. Crawford and Mr. Dwyer they have formalized their curriculum using a systematic progression of skill acquisition. The lecture will detail the program's organic development over the last 16years. It will also explain the scientific measurement tools recently applied to the curriculum.

Training for robotics in general surgery: is it where it should be?

Training for robotics in general surgery: is it where it should be?

First 100 consecutive robotic inguinal hernia repairs at a Veterans Affairs hospital.

The utilization of robotics in general surgery has increased significantly including usage in the Veterans Affairs (VA) system. We implemented a robotic inguinal hernia repair (RIHR) program in our VA hospital and report on initial experience with safety and outcomes. The first 100 consecutive RIHR at a VA hospital were reviewed and compared against the results of contemporaneous open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR). Data were collected for operative characteristics, surgical complications and pain related outcomes. Overall, operative times for OIHR were less than RIHR (83.7 vs. 109.7min, p < 0.0001); however, there was no difference in operative time for bilateral repairs (121.5 vs. 121.9min, p = ns). Complication rates were similar between the groups. RIHR patients had less pain at POD 1 than OIHR patients (p = 0.05). RIHR were less likely to have multiple post-op visits for pain than OIHR patients (p = 0.003). RIHR can be implemented in the VA system with acceptable surgical outcomes. RIHR may be associated with less post-operative pain in the early post-operative period.

Residency Training in Robotic General Surgery: A Survey of Program Directors.

Objective Robotic surgery continues to expand in minimally invasive surgery; however, the literature is insufficient to understand the current training process for general surgery residents. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to identify the current approach to and perspectives on robotic surgery training. Methods An electronic survey was distributed to general surgery program directors identified by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Multiple choice and open-ended questions regarding current practices and opinions on robotic surgery training in general surgery residency programs were used. Results20 program directors were surveyed, a majority being from medium-sized programs (4–7 graduating residents per year). Most respondents (73.68%) had a formal robotic surgery curriculum at their institution, with 63.16% incorporating simulation training. Approximately half of the respondents believe that more time should be dedicated to robotic surgery training (52.63%), with simulation training prior to console use (84.21%). About two-thirds of the respondents (63.16%) believe that a formal robotic surgery curriculum should be established as a part of general surgery residency, with more than half believing that exposure should occur in postgraduate year one (55%). Conclusion A formal robotics curriculum with simulation training and early surgical exposure for general surgery residents should be given consideration in surgical residency training.

Resident attitudes and compliance towards robotic surgical training

BackgroundAdoption of robotics in general surgery has expanded but there is no mandatory national standardized curriculum for general surgery residents (GSR). MethodsA survey was administered to all GSRs in 2014 addressing future practice and robotic experience. A non-mandatory robotic curriculum was available for residents to train. Compliance was assessed. In 2016, the same survey was re-administered. Barriers to completing the curriculum were identified. ResultsInterest in improving robotic skills remained high (2014 = 97.8% vs 2016 = 95.9%, p = 0.608), and the majority planned to incorporate robotics into future practice (77.8% vs 69.4%; p = 0.358). Only 11 residents (18%) voluntarily completed the curriculum while 36 (60%) started but did not complete. A trend toward increased procedure participation was seen (60.0%–77.6%, p = 0.066). The perceived barriers to completion of the curriculum were length of time required (80%) and lack of access to a simulator (60%). ConclusionsA structured robotic training curriculum that is non-mandatory is insufficient in helping residents gain fundamental robotic skills.

Concurrent Robotic Kidney and General Surgery Procedures

Introduction: When kidney tumors are found incidentally during evaluation of a general surgery condition, patients may request concurrent robotic surgeries to address both issues simultaneously.1,2 This video shows two such cases: first a concurrent robotic nephrectomy and cholecystectomy and second a concurrent robotic partial nephrectomy with partial gastrectomy. Methods: Robotic nephrectomy and cholecystectomy: A 46-year-old woman with right upper quadrant pain was found to have cholelithiasis and a 7.1 cm right renal mass. The procedure was performed with the daVinci Si system with a four-arm approach and flank position with no redocking. Ports were placed for robotic kidney surgery with a 5 mm subxiphoid port for a liver retractor. The upper pole attachments of the kidney were mobilized, facilitating cranial retraction of the liver and exposure of the gallbladder. The nephrectomy was done first and hilar vessels were ligated with specimen being placed in a retrieval bag. Attention was turned to the cholecystectomy, and the cystic duct and artery were dissected and ligated with robotic hemlock clips. The remaining gallbladder attachments were freed and the specimen was removed through retrieval bag. Robotic partial nephrectomy and partial gastrectomy: A 66-year-old woman with gastrointestinal symptoms was found to have a 3.1 cm enhancing mass off the gastric fundus consistent with a gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and an incidental 4 cm renal mass of the left lower pole. The procedure was performed with the daVinci Si system with a four-arm transabdominal approach in flank position and no redocking. Ports were placed for robotic kidney surgery with a Gelpoint for the assistant port to allow intraoperative assessment of the specimens. The partial gastrectomy was performed first, using the robotic vessel sealer to expose the gastric fundus. The endoGIA stapler was used to remove the lesion at its base with negative margins, which was removed through a retrieval bag through the Gelpoint. Partial nephrectomy was performed next. The colon was mobilized and the renal hilar vessels were dissected. Intraoperative ultrasound was used to delineate tumor margins and the tumor was excised through sharp and blunt dissection. Results: Robotic nephrectomy and cholecystectomy: operating room (OR) time was 170 minutes, estimated blood loss (EBL) was 30 mL, and hospital stay was 1 day. Final pathology report confirmed a 7.1 cm chromophobe renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) with sarcomatoid differentiation (pT2a). Gallbladder pathology report showed acute cholecystitis and cholelithiasis. Robotic partial nephrectomy and partial gastrectomy: OR time was 150 minutes, EBL was 200 mL, and hospital stay was 3 days. Final pathology report confirmed a 4 cm papillary RCC type 1 (pT1a), grade 3. Partial gastrectomy pathology report confirmed a 3.1 cm GIST tumor. An additional two cases were performed, including a nephrectomy showing clear RCC (pT4) with partial hepatectomy caused by RCC extension into the liver. The second case involved a nephrectomy demonstrating clear RCC (pT1b) alongside a right hemicolectomy because of tubulovillous adenoma. All procedures documented had negative margins and no complications. Conclusion: This video demonstrates the feasibility of concurrent robotic kidney procedures in conjunction with robotic general surgery procedures. With careful planning and proper technique, robotic kidney and robotic general surgery procedures may be performed simultaneously with favorable outcomes. No competing financial interests exist. Author(s) have received and archived patient consent for video recording/publication in advance of video recording of procedure. Runtime of video: 7 mins 47 secs This video was presented at the North American Robotic Urology Symposium, February 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Robotic hepatectomy: the Korean experience and perspective.

Since the robotic surgical system was first introduced in 2005, the number of robotic surgery has been gradually increasing in Korea. The proportion of general robotic surgery is relatively higher compared to the western countries, but robotic liver resection is one of the most complex procedures among robotic general surgery. In this article, we introduce the development of robotic liver resection in Korea and describe our standardized techniques. The current data on robotic liver resection in our institute and other centers in Korea are also presented.

An appraisal of the learning curve in robotic general surgery.

Robotic-assisted surgery is used with increasing frequency in general surgery for a variety of applications. In spite of this increase in usage, the learning curve is not yet defined. This study reviews the literature on the learning curve in robotic general surgery to inform adopters of the technology. PubMed and EMBASE searches yielded 3690 abstracts published between July 1986 and March 2016. The abstracts were evaluated based on the following inclusion criteria: written in English, reporting original work, focus on general surgery operations, and with explicit statistical methods. Twenty-six full-length articles were included in final analysis. The articles described the learning curves in colorectal (9 articles, 35%), foregut/bariatric (8, 31%), biliary (5, 19%), and solid organ (4, 15%) surgery. Eighteen of 26 (69%) articles report single-surgeon experiences. Time was used as a measure of the learning curve in all studies (100%); outcomes were examined in 10 (38%). In 12 studies (46%), the authors identified three phases of the learning curve. Numbers of cases needed to achieve plateau performance were wide-ranging but overlapping for different kinds of operations: 19-128 cases for colorectal, 8-95 for foregut/bariatric, 20-48 for biliary, and 10-80 for solid organ surgery. Although robotic surgery is increasingly utilized in general surgery, the literature provides few guidelines on the learning curve for adoption. In this heterogeneous sample of reviewed articles, the number of cases needed to achieve plateau performance varies by case type and the learning curve may have multiple phases as surgeons add more complex cases to their case mix with growing experience. Time is the most common determinant for the learning curve. The literature lacks a uniform assessment of outcomes and complications, which would arguably reflect expertise in a more meaningful way than time to perform the operation alone.

Robotics in general surgery: A systematic cost assessment.

The utilisation of robotic-assisted techniques is a novelty in the field of general surgery. Our intention was to examine the up to date available literature on the cost assessment of robotic surgery of diverse operations in general surgery. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched in a systematic way to retrieve the included studies in our review. Thirty-one studies were retrieved, referring on a vast range of surgical operations. The mean cost for robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 2539 to 57,002, 7888 to 16,851 and 1799 to 50,408 Euros, respectively. The mean operative charges ranged from 273.74 to 13,670 Euros. More specifically, for the robotic and laparoscopic gastric fundoplication, the cost ranged from 1534 to 2257 and 657 to 763 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic colectomy, it ranged from 3739 to 17,080 and 3109 to 33,865 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy, ranged from 1163.75 to 1291 and from 273.74 to 1223 Euros, respectively. The mean non-operative costs ranged from 900 to 48,796 from 8347 to 8800 and from 870 to 42,055 Euros, for robotic, open and laparoscopic technique, respectively. Conversions to laparotomy were present in 34/18,620 (0.18%) cases of laparoscopic and in 22/1488 (1.5%) cases of robotic technique. Duration of surgery robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 54.6 to 328.7, 129 to 234, and from 50.2 to 260 min, respectively. The present evidence reveals that robotic surgery, under specific conditions, has the potential to become cost-effective. Large number of cases, presence of industry competition and multidisciplinary team utilisation are some of the factors that could make more reasonable and cost-effective the robotic-assisted technique.

Early clinical experience with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System in general surgery.

The da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been released in 2014 to facilitate minimally invasive surgery. Novel features are targeted towards facilitating complex multi-quadrant procedures, but data is scarce so far. Perioperative data of patients who underwent robotic general surgery with the da Vinci Xi system within the first 6month after installation were collected and analyzed. The gastric bypass procedures performed with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System were compared to an equal amount of the last procedures with the da Vinci Si Surgical System. Thirty-one foregut (28 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses), 6 colorectal procedures and 1 revisional biliary procedure were performed. The mean operating room (OR) time was 221.8 (±69.0) minutes for gastric bypasses and 306.5 (±48.8) for colorectal procedures with mean docking time of 9.4 (±3.8) minutes. The gastric bypass procedure was transitioned from a hybrid to a fully robotic approach. In comparison to the last 28 gastric bypass procedures performed with the da Vinci Si Surgical System, the OR time was comparable (226.9 versus 230.6min, p=0.8094), but the docking time significantly longer with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System (8.5 versus 6.1min, p=0.0415). All colorectal procedures were performed with a single robotic docking. No intraoperative and two postoperative complications occurred. The da Vinci Xi might facilitate single-setups of totally robotic gastric bypass and colorectal surgeries. However, further comparable research is needed to clearly determine the significance of this latest version of the da Vinci Surgical System.

Robotic right hemicolectomy: Analysis of 108 consecutive procedures and multidimensional assessment of the learning curve

PurposeSurgeons tend to view the robotic right colectomy (RRC) as an ideal beginning procedure to gain proficiency in robotic general and colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, oncological RRC, especially if performed with intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis confectioning, cannot be considered a technically easier procedure. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve of the RRC performed for oncological purposes and to evaluate its safety and efficacy investigating the perioperative and pathology outcomes in the different learning phases. MethodsData on a consecutive series of 108 patients undergoing RRC with intracorporeal anastomosis between June 2011 and September 2015 at our institution were prospectively collected to evaluate surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. CUSUM (Cumulative Sum) and Risk-Adjusted (RA) CUSUM analysis were performed in order to perform a multidimensional assessment of the learning curve for the RRC surgical procedure. Intraoperative, postoperative and pathological outcomes were compared among the learning curve phases. ResultsBased on the CUSUM and RA-CUSUM analyses, the learning curve for RRC could be divided into 3 different phases: phase 1, the initial learning period (1st–44th case); phase 2, the consolidation period (45th–90th case); and phase 3, the mastery period (91th–108th case). Operation time, conversion to open surgery rate and the number of harvested lymph nodes significantly improve through the three learning phases. ConclusionsThe learning curve for oncological RRC with intracorporeal anastomosis is composed of 3 phases. Our data indicate that the performance of RRC is safe from an oncological point of view in all of the three phases of the learning curve. However, the technical skills necessary to significantly reduce operative time, conversion to open surgery rate and to significantly improve the number of harvested lymph nodes were achieved after 44 procedures. These data suggest that it might be prudent to start the RRC learning curve by treating only benign diseases and to reserve the performance of oncological resection to when at least the initial learning phase has been completed.

Risk factors for postoperative complications in robotic general surgery.

The feasibility and safety of robotically assisted procedures in general surgery have been reported from various groups worldwide. Because postoperative complications may lead to longer hospital stays and higher costs overall, analysis of risk factors for postoperative surgical complications in this subset of patients is clinically relevant. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for postoperative morbidity after robotic surgical procedures in general surgery. We performed an observational monocentric retrospective study. All consecutive robotic surgical procedures from November 2001 to December 2013 were included. One thousand consecutive general surgery patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean overall postoperative morbidity and major postoperative morbidity (Clavien >III) rates were 20.4 and 6%, respectively. This included a conversion rate of 4.4%, reoperation rate of 4.5%, and mortality rate of 0.2%. Multivariate analysis showed that ASA score >3 [OR 1.7; 95% CI (1.2-2.4)], hematocrit value <38 [OR 1.6; 95% CI (1.1-2.2)], previous abdominal surgery [OR 1.5; 95% CI (1-2)], advanced dissection [OR 5.8; 95% CI (3.1-10.6)], and multiquadrant surgery [OR 2.5; 95% CI (1.7-3.8)] remained independent risk factors for overall postoperative morbidity. It also showed that advanced dissection [OR 4.4; 95% CI (1.9-9.6)] and multiquadrant surgery [OR 4.4; 95% CI (2.3-8.5)] remained independent risk factors for major postoperative morbidity (Clavien >III). This study identifies independent risk factors for postoperative overall and major morbidity in robotic general surgery. Because these factors independently impacted postoperative complications, we believe they could be taken into account in future studies comparing conventional versus robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures in general surgery.

Robotic Training in General Surgery Residency: How Early Can We Begin?

Background: The increasing demand for robotics in general surgery has prompted academic institutions to train general surgery residents toward the acquisition of basic robotic skills. Our current robotic training curriculum begins in the PGY-3 year and is based on the use of surgical simulators in a risk-free environment, in which each resident must show proficiency prior to advancing to training on an animate model as PGY-4. Our unpublished data on the curriculum indicates that PGY-3s required additional remediation training on the robotic simulator, suggesting room for improvement in our teaching paradigm [8]. Because of resident duty hour restrictions, we could not provide remediation by simply increasing the number of training sessions.

First 101 Robotic General Surgery Cases in a Community Hospital.

Background and Objectives:The general surgeon's robotic learning curve may improve if the experience is classified into categories based on the complexity of the procedures in a small community hospital. The intraoperative time should decrease and the incidence of complications should be comparable to conventional laparoscopy. The learning curve of a single robotic general surgeon in a small community hospital using the da Vinci S platform was analyzed.Methods:Measured parameters were operative time, console time, conversion rates, complications, surgical site infections (SSIs), surgical site occurrences (SSOs), length of stay, and patient demographics.Results:Between March 2014 and August 2015, 101 robotic general surgery cases were performed by a single surgeon in a 266-bed community hospital, including laparoscopic cholecystectomies, inguinal hernia repairs; ventral, incisional, and umbilical hernia repairs; and colorectal, foregut, bariatric, and miscellaneous procedures. Ninety-nine of the cases were completed robotically. Seven patients were readmitted within 30 days. There were 8 complications (7.92%). There were no mortalities and all complications were resolved with good outcomes. The mean operative time was 233.0 minutes. The mean console operative time was 117.6 minutes.Conclusion:A robotic general surgery program can be safely implemented in a small community hospital with extensive training of the surgical team through basic robotic skills courses as well as supplemental educational experiences. Although the use of the robotic platform in general surgery could be limited to complex procedures such as foregut and colorectal surgery, it can also be safely used in a large variety of operations with results similar to those of conventional laparoscopy.

A Defined Pathway to Teach and Credential Safe Robotic Thoracic Surgery

Robotic surgery is growing in popularity and is an important tool in the armamentarium of the modern cardiothoracic surgeon. The successful development of a robotic general thoracic surgery program begins with appropriate surgeon and team selection. The process of learning how to independently complete operations entirely with a robotic approach depends on a step by step progression of collection of skills and teamwork. The process begins with optimal patient selection, realistic expectations for the first several cases, dedicated robotic time of at least one day a week, and a progression toward competent and safe robotic thoracic surgery. Simpler operations are mastered first; complex operations are broken up into multiple steps of increasing difficulty and risk, which are learned in succession. Adverse events can be avoided and safety maximized by adhering to basic rules of engagement and attending basic and advanced courses that teach teams and not just surgeons. Smooth conduct of the operation can be achieved with practice and using troubleshooting maneuvers when needed and by learning from the mistakes of others.

Robotic general surgery: current practice, evidence, and perspective.

Robotic technology commenced to be adopted for the field of general surgery in the 1990s. Since then, the da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has remained by far the most commonly used system in this domain. The da Vinci surgical system is a master-slave machine that offers three-dimensional vision, articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom, and additional software features such as motion scaling and tremor filtration. The specific design allows hand-eye alignment with intuitive control of the minimally invasive instruments. As such, robotic surgery appears technologically superior when compared with laparoscopy by overcoming some of the technical limitations that are imposed on the surgeon by the conventional approach. This article reviews the current literature and the perspective of robotic general surgery. While robotics has been applied to a wide range of general surgery procedures, its precise role in this field remains a subject of further research. Until now, only limited clinical evidence that could establish the use of robotics as the gold standard for procedures of general surgery has been created. While surgical robotics is still in its infancy with multiple novel systems currently under development and clinical trials in progress, the opportunities for this technology appear endless, and robotics should have a lasting impact to the field of general surgery.