Use Of Robotic-assisted Surgery Research Articles

Robotic-assisted surgery for left-sided colon and rectal resections is associated with reduction in the postoperative surgical stress response and improved short-term outcomes: a cohort study.

There is growing evidence that the use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in colorectal cancer resections is associated with improved short-term outcomes when compared to laparoscopic surgery (LS) or open surgery (OS), possibly through a reduced systemic inflammatory response (SIR). Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) is a sensitive SIR biomarker and its utility in the early identification of post-operative complications has been validated in a variety of surgical procedures. There remains a paucity of studies characterising post-operative SIR in RAS. Retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients undergoing OS, LS and RAS for left-sided and rectal cancer in a single high-volume unit. Patient and disease characteristics, post-operative CRP levels, and clinical outcomes were reviewed, and their relationships explored within binary logistic regression and propensity scores matched models. A total of 1031 patients were included (483 OS, 376 LS, and 172 RAS). RAS and LS were associated with lower CRP levels across the first 4 post-operative days (p < 0.001) as well as reduced complications and length of stay compared to OS in unadjusted analyses. In binary logistic regression models, RAS was independently associated with lower CRP levels at Day 3 post-operatively (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.21-0.59, p < 0.001) and a reduction in the rate of all complications (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26-0.56, p < 0.001) and major complications (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p = 0.036). Within a propensity scores matched model comparing LS versus RAS specifically, RAS was associated with lower post-operative CRP levels in the first two post-operative days, a lower proportion of patients with a CRP ≥ 150 mg/L at Day 3 (20.9% versus30.5%, p = 0.036) and a lower rate of all complications (34.7% versus 46.7%, p = 0.033). The present observational study shows that an RAS approach was associated with lower postoperative SIR, and a better postoperative complications profile.

Surgical approach to splenic flexure adenocarcinoma of the colon: Less is more?

IntroductionDue to the watershed vasculature and lymphatic drainage of splenic flexure (SF) neoplasms, and their exclusion from large clinical trials, optimal management remains debated. This study evaluated extent of resection and surgical approach for SF adenocarcinoma and their respective outcomes. MethodsAdults with stage I-III splenic flexure adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004–2020) and categorized by surgical management. ResultsOf 7412 patients, 4264 (58%) underwent extended colectomy (EC). The cohorts were overall similar, though more patients with stage I disease were managed with segmental colectomy (SC) (24% vs. 20%, p < 0.01). Those undergoing EC had longer hospital stays (LOS) and greater odds of readmission. Use of robotic-assisted surgery was higher in SC (9% vs. 7%, p < 0.01) and increased from 1% in 2010 to 24% in 2020. This approach was independently associated with a shorter LOS than open surgery. Despite a higher number of lymph nodes examined (median 18 vs. 16), EC and SC had similar nodal (both 37%, p = 0.95) and margin involvement (both 4%, p = 0.39). Five-year survival after EC and SC was similar (75% vs. 76%, p = 0.6). Patients undergoing robotic surgery had significantly lower odds of positive surgical margins and experienced an improved prognosis. ConclusionsEC and SC were performed at similar rates for SF adenocarcinoma, while the use of robotic surgery increased over time. Neither extent of resection nor surgical approach significantly impacted oncologic outcomes. These data indicate that surgical decision-making should be balanced between tumor- and patient-specific considerations, morbidity of extended colectomy, and surgeon preference. SynopsisIn a national cohort of splenic flexure cancers, segmental and extended colectomy were associated with comparable rates of negative margins, nodal involvement, and survival. Robotic assist increased over time without impacting oncologic outcomes. Surgical procedure and approach should thus be tailored to clinical condition and surgeon preference.

Initial Experience With Robotic-Assisted Otologic and Lateral Skull Base Surgery.

Robotic-assisted surgery has gained popularity for otolaryngology procedures. It provides high-definition images and surgical precision to perform diverse procedures. It is an alternative to the operating microscope, endoscope, or exoscope when reaching hidden anatomical structures in the ear. In this proof-of-concept study, we aim to demonstrate the possibility of using a robotic-assisted device to perform ear surgery in conjunction with the microscope or the endoscope. In total, there were 9 ear and lateral skull base procedures performed with the use of robotic-assisted surgery. All surgeons underwent surveys to assess the performance and workload of the device compared to the microscope or endoscope. There were no postoperative complications. Robotic-assisted surgery was optimal for providing high image quality, ergonomics, and maintaining surgical performance. The size of the device and mental demand were higher compared to the microscope or endoscope. Robotic-assisted surgery can be an adjuvant to perform otologic and neurotologic surgery.

Robotic hernia repair: the trainee "Drag" factor-a single-surgeon 9-year experience.

The use of robotic assisted surgery is increasing but training residents in its use may be associated with increased operative time and cost. The objective of this study is to compare the operative time of robotic incisional/ventral hernia repair (RIVHR) and robotic inguinal hernia repair (RIHR) when performed with and without a resident or fellow trainee. A review of prospectively collected data was performed on all patients who underwent RIVHR and RIHR by a single surgeon over a 9-year period (2014-2023). Study variables included presence of trainee (resident or fellow), procedure time, console time, and recurrent hernia. Primary outcomes include procedure time and console time. A total of 402 surgeries were included for analysis. Residents assisted in 190 (47%) of the procedures, while fellows assisted in 97 (24%), and 115 (29%) were performed without a trainee. Median (IQR) console times in RIVHR assisted by fellows was 102 (72-145) minutes, compared to 90 (71-129) minutes among surgeries assisted by residents and 65 (52-82) minutes among surgeries performed without a trainee (p < 0.0001), a similar trend was observed for RIHR. The duration of hernia repair assisted by trainees was significantly longer than surgeries performed without a trainee. Operative time for RIVHR and RIHR is significantly lower when performed without a trainee. However, RIHR assisted by residents showed a consistent decrease in operative time over the 9-year period.

No Benefit of Robotic-Assisted over Computer-Assisted Surgery for Achieving Neutral Coronal Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is becoming increasingly popular due to better precision, potentially superior outcomes and the ability to achieve alternative alignment strategies. The most commonly used alignment strategy with RAS is a modification of mechanical alignment (MA), labeled adjusted MA (aMA). This strategy allows slight joint line obliquity of the tibial component to achieve superior balancing. In the present study, we compared coronal alignment after TKA using RAS with aMA and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) with MA that has been the standard in the center for more than 10 years. We analyzed a prospectively collected database of patients undergoing TKA in a single center. Lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) were compared for both techniques. In 140 patients, 68 CASs and 72 RASs, we observed no difference in postoperative measurements (median 90 degrees for all, LDFA p = 0.676, MPTA p = 0.947) and no difference in outliers <2 degrees (LDFA p = 0.540, MPTA p = 0.250). The present study demonstrates no benefit in eliminating outliers or achieving neutral alignment of both the femoral and the tibial components in robotic-assisted versus computer-assisted TKA if MA is the target. To utilize the precision of RAS, it is recommended to aim for more personalized alignment strategies. The level of evidence is level III retrospective study.

Investigation into the current status of cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization of da Vinci surgical instruments-a cross-sectional survey.

In recent years, the use of robotic-assisted surgery has developed rapidly in China and is now widely used in many clinical fields. However, da Vinci robotic surgical instruments are more precise, expensive, and complex than ordinary laparoscopes, have less instrument configuration, involve restrictions on the duration of use, and have cleanliness requirements for supporting instruments. The purpose of this study was to analyze and summarize the current status of cleaning, disinfection, and maintenance of da Vinci robotic surgical instruments in China to improve the management of these devices. A questionnaire survey on the use of da Vinci robotic-assisted surgery at medical institutions in China was designed, distributed, and analyzed. The survey included items regarding general information, management of instrument handling personnel, instrument handling techniques, guidelines, and references for instrument handling. The results and conclusions were formed from the data generated by the analysis system and the answers of respondents to the open-ended questions. (I) All surgical instruments used in domestic surgery practice were imported. There were 25 hospitals that conduct more than 500 da Vinci robotic-assisted surgeries every year. (II) In a relatively high proportion of medical institutions, nurses continued to be responsible for the processes of cleaning (46%), disinfection (66%), and low-temperature sterilization (50%). (III) A total of 62% of the surveyed institutions used fully manual methods for cleaning instruments, and 30% of the ultrasonic cleaning equipment in surveyed institutions did not comply with the standard. (IV) A total of 28% of surveyed institutions used only visual inspection to evaluate cleaning efficacy. Only 16-32% of surveyed institutions regularly used adenosine triphosphate (ATP), residual protein, and other methods to detect sterilization of cavities in instruments. (V) In 60% of the surveyed institutions, robotic surgical instruments have been damaged. Cleaning efficacy detection methods of robotic surgical instruments were not uniform and standardized. The management of device protection operations should be further regulated. In addition, further study of relevant guidelines and specifications as well as the training of operators is warranted.

Patients' experience of robotic-assisted surgery: a qualitative study

The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has increased considerably since its introduction in 2001, with RAS now being widely accepted as a surgical modality. Current literature surrounding RAS focuses on the surgical team's experience rather than the patient's perspective, with limited qualitative research on post-RAS patient experience. To explore patient-reported experience following RAS. Twelve semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted. Interviews were audio recorded with data transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Themes included: factors specific to the robotic modality and psychological factors. Participant concerns emanated from their experience of a lack of pre-operative preparation, resulting in feelings of anxiety and some negative perceptions of RAS. Given the limited time for patient preparation for RAS, work developing patient information that is also patient-led would be of benefit. Pre-operative preparation is a key nursing role' and further research could explore nurses' experiences of preparing patients for RAS, facilitators and barriers to providing optimum patient preparation in this context.

National analysis of cost disparities in robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic abdominal operations

BackgroundAlthough the use of robotic-assisted surgery continues to expand, the cost-effectiveness of this platform remains unclear. The present study aimed to compare hospitalization costs and clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted surgery and laparoscopic approaches for major abdominal operations. MethodsAll adults receiving minimally invasive gastrectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy (right, left, transverse, sigmoid), ventral hernia repair, hysterectomy, and abdominoperineal resection were identified in the 2012 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample. Records with concurrent operations were excluded. Multivariable linear and logistic regressions were developed to examine the association of the operative approach with costs, length of stay, and complications. An interaction term between the year and operative approach was used to analyze cost differences over time. ResultsOf an estimated 1,124,450 patients, 75.8% had laparoscopic surgery, and 24.2% had robotic-assisted surgery. Compared to laparoscopic, patients with robotic-assisted operations were younger and more commonly privately insured. The average hospitalization cost for laparoscopic cases was $16,000 ± 14,800 and robotic-assisted cases was $18,300 ± 13,900 (P < .001). Regardless of procedure type, all robotic-assisted operations had higher costs compared to laparoscopic operations. Risk-adjusted trend analysis revealed that the discrepancy in costs between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery persisted and widened over time from $1,600 in 2012 to $2,600 in 2019. Compared to laparoscopic procedures, robotic procedures had a 2.2% reduction in complications (9.4 vs 11.6%, P < .001) and a 0.7-day decrement in the length of stay (95% confidence interval −0.8 to −0.7). ConclusionDisparities in costs between robotic and laparoscopic abdominal operations have persisted over time. Given the modest decrement in adverse outcomes, further investigation into the clinical benefits of robotic surgery is warranted to justify its greater costs.

Robotic-assisted surgery in pediatrics: what is evidence-based?-a literature review.

The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has increased more slowly in pediatrics than in the adult population. Despite the many advantages of robotic instruments, the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) still presents some limitations for use in pediatric surgery. This study aims to examine evidence-based indications for RAS in the different fields of pediatric surgery according to the published literature. A database search (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science) was performed to identify articles covering any aspect of RAS in the pediatric population. Using Boolean operators AND/OR, all possible combinations of the following search terms were used: robotic surgery, pediatrics, neonatal surgery, thoracic surgery, abdominal surgery, urologic surgery, hepatobiliary surgery, and surgical oncology. The selection criteria were limited to the English language, pediatric patients (under 18 years of age), and articles published after 2010. A total of 239 abstracts were reviewed. Of these, 10 published articles met the purposes of our study with the highest level of evidence and therefore were analyzed. Notably, most of the articles included in this review reported evidence-based indications in urological surgery. According to this study, the exclusive indications for RAS in the pediatric population are pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in older children and ureteral reimplantation according to the Lich-Gregoire technique in selected cases for the need to access the pelvis with a narrow anatomical and working space. All other indications for RAS in pediatric surgery are still under discussion to date, and cannot be supported by papers with a high level of evidence. However, RAS is certainly a promising technology. Further evidence is strongly encouraged in the future.

Right Hemicolectomy with Complete Mesocolic Excision Using the Versius Surgical System: A Step-by-Step Guide.

The application of new robotic platforms in colorectal surgery has increased greatly in the last 10 years. New systems have been released and entered the surgical panorama, broadening the technological offer. Robotic surgery applied to colorectal oncological surgery has been widely described. Hybrid robotic surgery in right sided colonic cancer has been previously reported. According to the site and local extension of a right-sided colon cancer, a different lymphadenectomy could be required. For more distant and locally advanced tumors a complete mesocolic excision (CME) is indicated. CME for right colon cancer is a complex operation compared to standard right hemicolectomy. Therefore a hybrid robotic system may be effectively applied to CME during a minimally-invasive right hemicolectomy to improve the dissection accuracy. Here we report a step-by-step hybrid laparoscopic/robotic right hemicolectomy with CME performed with the Versius Surgical System, a tele-operated surgical robotic system intended for the use of robotic assisted surgery.

Cost analysis of training residents in robotic-assisted surgery.

Use of robotic-assisted surgery is increasing, and resident involvement may lead to higher costs. We investigated whether senior resident involvement in noncomplex robotic cholecystectomy (RC) and inguinal hernia (RIH) would take more time and cost more when compared to non-robotic cholecystectomy (NRC) and inguinal hernia repair (NRIH). We extracted surgery duration and total cost of NRC, NRIH, RC, and RIH from 7/2016 to 6/2020 with senior resident (PGY4-5) involvement. We excluded complex cases as well as prisoner cases and those with new faculty and research residents. We assessed differences between robotic and non-robotic cases in surgery duration and total cost per minute, using one-way ANOVA. We included 1608 cases (non-robotic 1145 vs. robotic 463). On average, RC cases with a senior resident took less time than NRC (179.4 < 185.8, p = 0.401); surgery duration of RIH cases was similar with NRIH cases. The total cost per minute of RC cases with a senior resident on average was $9.30 higher than NRC cases for each minute incurred in the operating room but did not lead to a significant change in overall cost. RIH cases, on the other hand, cost less per minute than NRIH cases (114.1 < 126.5, p = 0.399). Training in robotic surgery is important. Noncomplex RC and RIH involving senior residents were not significantly longer nor did they incur significantly more cost than non-robotic procedures. Senior resident training in noncomplex robotic surgery can be efficient and can be included in the residency curriculum.

Ethical Spending in Addressing Cancer Treatment, Screening, and Prevention

Focusing on the U.S., this chapter discuss the economic aspects that accompany cancer spending in case of prevention, screening, and treatment. While these three facets are all important in promoting patient health and safety, screening and prevention have been shown to have much lower cost compared with cancer therapeutics or in eliminating the health hazards in low- and moderate-income housing in New York City. The distribution of healthcare funds, however, does not accurately reflect the differences in impact on survival and quality of life. Finally, by focusing on treatments, they critically discuss how the increasing use of robotic-assisted surgery–expensive for healthcare facilities–may not be to the benefit of patients.

Status of robotic assisted surgery (RAS) and the effects of Coronavirus (COVID-19) on RAS in the Department of Defense (DoD).

The purpose of this study is to update the available literature with information on the current use of robotic assisted surgery (RAS) in the Department of Defense (DoD) compared to the civilian world, and how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted RAS in the DoD. A total of 9,979 RAS cases between 01st October 2017 and 31st December 2020 were reviewed from every DoD Military Treatment Facility (MTF) that meets our inclusion criteria and employs various models of da Vinci robotic surgical systems (Intuitive Surgical). Specialty, number, and facility were recorded for each case. These data were then compared to previously known trends about RAS use in the DoD as well as with civilian trends. Before COVID-19, the use of RAS had increased over time, but not at the same rate as in the civilian sector. General surgery cases constituted most RAS cases in both the DoD and the civilian sector. The arrival of COVID-19 in the United States significantly decreased the use of RAS in the DoD as well as in the civilian sector in all surgical specialties because it led to postponement or cancellation of many non-emergent surgical procedures. In conclusion, the use of RAS has continued to increase, and general surgery cases continue to constitute most of these cases. However, since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there was a significant decline in both DoD and civilian RAS cases, with a more pronounced decline in the DoD.

Attitudes and access of Irish general surgery trainees to robotic surgical training

BackgroundAlthough the use of robotic-assisted surgery is now mainstream for procedures such as robotic prostatectomy and hysterectomy, its role in general surgery is less well established. Access to training in robotics for general surgery trainees in the Republic of Ireland is variable. Further, there are no data on specific attitudes of Irish trainees toward the role of robotics. We aimed to establish attitudes of Irish general surgery trainees toward the perceived utility of robotic surgery as well as access and satisfaction with training. MethodsA survey was disseminated to trainees in the Republic of Ireland enrolled in a General Surgery training scheme via email and social media. Data collected included stage of training, intended subspecialty, interest in developing robotic skills, previous exposure to robotic surgery, satisfaction with current access to robotic training, and opinion on formally incorporating training in robotics into the general surgery curriculum. ResultsThe response rate was 53.8%. Of these, 83% reported interest in training in robotics and 66% anticipated using the technology regularly in consultant practice. Previous exposure to robotic-assisted surgery was significantly predictive of interest in developing the skillset (P = .014). More than 71% of trainees reported that they were not satisfied with access to robotic training. Of those satisfied with access, 40% felt there was a role for incorporating robotic training into the curriculum compared to 68% of those dissatisfied. ConclusionIrish general surgery trainees perceive robotic-assisted surgery to be highly relevant to their future practice. There is an unmet need to provide additional training in the skillset.

EP.TU.493Attitudes of Irish General Surgery trainees to Robotic-Assisted Surgery

Abstract Background While the use of robotic-assisted surgery is now mainstream for procedures such as robotic prostatectomy, its role in general surgery is less well established. Access to training in robotics for general surgery trainees in the Republic of Ireland is variable. Further, there is no data on attitudes of Irish trainees towards the role of robotics. We aimed to establish attitudes of Irish general surgery trainees towards the perceived utility of robotic surgery as well as access and satisfaction with training. Methods A survey was disseminated to trainees in the Republic of Ireland enrolled in a General Surgery training scheme via email and social media. Data collected included stage of training, intended subspecialty, interest in developing robotic skills, previous exposure to robotic surgery, satisfaction with current access to robotic training and opinion on formally incorporating training in robotics into the general surgery curriculum. Results The response rate was 44.8%. Of these, 83% reported interest in training in robotics and 69% anticipated using the technology regularly in consultant practice. Previous exposure to robotic-assisted surgery was significantly predictive of interest in developing the skillset (p = 0.014). Over 71% of trainees reported that they were not satisfied with access to robotic training. Of those satisfied with access, 40% felt there was a role for incorporating robotic training into the curriculum, compared to 68% of those dissatisfied. Conclusion Irish general surgery trainees perceive robotic-assisted surgery to be highly relevant to their future practice. There is an unmet need to provide additional training in the skillset.

Trends in the use of robotic-assisted surgery during the COVID 19 pandemic

Trends in the use of robotic-assisted surgery during the COVID 19 pandemic

Robotic-assisted harvest of latissimus dorsi muscle flap for breast reconstruction: review of the literature.

Robotic-assisted surgery continues to gain ground over conventional surgical methods, due to reported better results regarding the aesthetic outcome and the decreased percentage of complications. Although latissimus dorsi flap harvesting for breast reconstruction has been already used for several years, a plethora of serious complications has been reported. Recently, minimally invasive surgical approaches, such as robotic-assisted technique, have been suggested with conflicting outcomes to overcome technical difficulties. Therefore, the literature review was conducted regarding robotic-assisted harvesting of the latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction. A narrative review of the contemporary literature was performed in the PubMed database for the use of robotic-assisted surgery of latissimus dorsi muscle flap harvesting for breast reconstruction. Appropriate search terms were used, and specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Five studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 32 cases of robotically assisted harvesting of pedicled latissimus dorsi muscle flap for implant-based breast reconstruction have been identified. All flaps were successfully harvested without converting in the traditional open procedure. There were no significant postoperative complications, expect from few cases of postoperative seromas, which were conservatively managed. Additionally, all patients were satisfied with their postoperative cosmetic outcome. The robotic-assisted harvesting technique of the latissimus dorsi flap for breast reconstruction is safe and comparable to the conventional methods. Reduced hospital stays and superior aesthetic outcome are the main advantages, while total cost and the difficulty of reaching the learning curve plateau are the main concerns regarding this modern and minimally invasive surgical approach.

Robotic-Assisted Surgery Results in a Shorter Hospital Stay Following Revisional Bariatric Surgery.

Revisional surgery is rapidly growing within the field of bariatric surgery. The use of robotic assisted surgery, considered controversial by many, may offer advantages in revisional bariatric surgery (RBS). There are few studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic-assisted RBS. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and outcome of laparoscopic and robotic RBS in a single accredited center. A retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively on patients undergoing either laparoscopic (L-RBS) or robotic (R-RBS) RBS between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019 was performed. The primary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), 30-day major and minor complication rates, readmission rates, and mortality rates. A total of 167 patients were included in our analysis. Fifty-two patients underwent R-RBS (31%), and 115 underwent L-RBS (69%). Thirty-day major and minor complication rates for R-RBS and L-RBS were 1.9% and 5.8% vs 5.2% and 5.2%, respectively (p > .05). There was no difference in readmission rates (3.8% vs 8.7%, p > 0.05) or intraoperative blood loss (35.5mL vs 37.4mL, p > .05) between R-RBS and L-RBS. R-RBS resulted in a shorter length of stay when compared with L-RBS (40.2h vs 62.6h, p < .05). R-RBS has a decreased, albeit non-significant, rate of 30-day major complications with no difference in minor complications, readmission rates, or intraoperative blood loss when compared with L-RBS. R-RBS resulted in a decreased length of stay when compared with L-RBS. Randomized clinical trials are needed to better elucidate our findings.

Simultaneous robotic kidney transplantation and bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal failure.

Patients with obesity have limited access to kidney transplantation, mainly due to an increased incidence of surgical complications, which could be reduced with selective use of robotic-assisted surgery. This prospective randomized controlled trial compares the safety and efficacy of combining robotic sleeve gastrectomy and robotic-assisted kidney transplant to robotic kidney transplant alone in candidates with class II or III obesity. Twenty candidates were recruited, 11 were randomized to the robotic sleeve gastrectomy and robotic-assisted kidney transplant group and 9 to the robotic kidney transplant group. At 12-month follow-up, change in body mass index was -8.76±1.82 in the robotic sleeve gastrectomy and robotic-assisted kidney transplant group compared to 1.70±2.30 in the robotic kidney transplant group (P=.0041). Estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum creatinine, readmission rates, and graft failure rates up to 12months were not different between the two groups. Length of surgery was longer in the robotic sleeve gastrectomy and robotic-assisted kidney transplant group (405 minutes vs. 269 minutes, p=.00304) without increase in estimated blood loss (120ml vs. 117ml, p=.908) or incidence of surgical complications. Combined robotic-assisted kidney transplant and sleeve gastrectomy is safe and effective compared to robotic-assisted kidney transplant alone.

Robotic Head and Neck Surgery: Beyond TORS.

To explore the advances in robotic head and neck surgery (HNS) beyond TORS. Although limited, the current literature corroborates the safety of robotic neck surgery, revealing similar surgical/oncologic outcomes, except longer operative time and superior cosmesis. In most of the remote thyroid approaches, use of robotic-assisted surgery is essential. However, for the recently popularized transoral approach, endoscopic technique has been preferred by most surgeons, due to longer operative time in robotic-assisted technique. On the other hand, retroauricular approach has been considered the standard for comprehensive/selective robotic neck dissections. Robotic technology has an increasing role in HNS. Robotic neck dissection has shown encouraging results, being routinely used in some centers around the globe. Robotic thyroid surgery, although safe when well applied, has lost ground to endoscopic transoral thyroidectomy. In the future, more evolved robotic systems could improve multiple areas of HNS.