Robotic approaches to the posterior spine

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 19, 2009, Pages 2104-2109

  Ponnusamy, Karthikeyan ^a   Chewning, Samuel ^b   Mohr, Catherine ^a,c,d  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b North Carolina Association of Independent Investigators   (United States)

^c INTUITIVE SURGICAL INC   (United States)

^d Bldg 102 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Da Vinci; Durotomy; Feasibility studies; Laminectomy; Laminoplasty; Laminotomy; Posterior spine surgery; Robotic surgery; Surgical procedures

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; ERGONOMICS; FEMALE; LAMINECTOMY; LASER SURGERY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROBOTICS; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE SURGERY; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; SUTURING METHOD; THORACOLUMBAR SPINE;

ANIMALS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FATIGUE; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMAN ENGINEERING; HUMANS; LAMINECTOMY; LASER COAGULATION; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MODELS, ANIMAL; MOTOR SKILLS; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; OSTEOTOMY; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SWINE; THORACIC VERTEBRAE; TREMOR;

EID: 70349117755     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b20212     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Waljee JF, Greenfield LJ. Aging and surgeon performance. Adv Surg 2007; 41:189-198
2. Kadefors R. Ergonomics: a new frontier in medical engineering. Med Prog Technol 1982;9:149-152
3. Berguer R. Surgery and ergonomics. Arch Surg 1999;134:1011-1016
4. Mirbod SM, Yoshida H, Miyamoto K, et al. Subjective complaints in orthopedists and general surgeons. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1995; 67:179-186
5. Matern U, Koneczny S. Safety, hazards and ergonomics in the operating room. Surg Endosc 2007;21:1965-1969
6. Hackel ME, Wolfe GA, Bang SM, et al. Changes in hand function in the aging adult as determined by the Jebsen Test of Hand Function. Phys Ther 1992; 72:373-377
7. Keogh J, Morrison S, Barrett R. Age-related differences in inter-digit coupling during finger pinching. Eur J Appl Physiol 2006;97:76-88.
8. Jackson GR, Owsley C. Visual dysfunction, neurodegenerative diseases, and aging. Neurol Clin 2003;21:709-728
9. Jackson GR, Owsley C, Cordle EP, et al. Aging and scotopic sensitivity. Vision Res 1998;38:3655-3662
10. Mani TM, Bedwell JS, Miller LS. Age-related decrements in performance on a brief continuous performance test. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2005; 20:575-586
11. Peisah C, Wilhelm K. The impaired ageing doctor. Int Med J 2002;32: 457-459
12. Greenfield LJ. Farewell to surgery. J Vasc Surg 1994;19:6-14.
13. O'Neill L, Lanska DJ, Hartz A. Surgeon characteristics associated with mortality and morbidity following carotid endarterectomy. Neurology 2000;55: 773-781
14. Hartz AJ, Kuhn EM, Pulido J. Prestige of training programs and experience of bypass surgeons as factors in adjusted patient mortality rates. Med Care 1999;37:93-103.
15. Neumayer LA, Gawande AA, Wang J, et al. Proficiency of surgeons in inguinal hernia repair: effect of experience and age. Ann Surg 2005;242:344-8; discussion 348-352
16. Waljee JF, Greenfield LJ, Dimick JB, et al. Surgeon age and operative mortality in the United States. Ann Surg 2006;244:353-362
17. Tafazal SI, Sell PJ. Incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery: incidence and management. Eur Spine J 2005;14:287-290
18. Sin AH, Caldito G, Smith D, et al. Predictive factors for dural tear and cerebrospinal fluid leakage in patients undergoing lumbar surgery. J Neurosurg 2006;5:224-227
19. Bosacco SJ, Gardner MJ, Guille JT. Evaluation and treatment of dural tears in lumbar spine surgery: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001:238-247
20. Hakimi AA, Feder M, Ghavamian R. Minimally invasive approaches to prostate cancer: a review of the current literature. Urol J 2007;4:130-137
21. Advincula AP, Song A. The role of robotic surgery in gynecology. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007;19:331-336
22. Kappert U, Tugtekin SM, Cichon R, et al. Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass: a word of caution implicated by a five-year follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:857-862
23. Byrn JC, Schluender S, Divino CM, et al. Three-dimensional imaging improves surgical performance for both novice and experienced operators using the da Vinci Robot System. Am J Surg 2007;193:519-522
24. Gutt CN, Markus B, Kim ZG, et al. Early experiences of robotic surgery in children. Surg Endosc 2002;16:1083-1086
25. Ballantyne GH, Moll F. The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery. Surg Clin North Am 2003;83:1293-304, vii.
26. Southerland SR, Remedios AM, McKerrell JG, et al. Laparoscopic approaches to the lumbar vertebrae. An anatomic study using a porcine model. Spine 1995;20:1620-1623
27. Burgos J, Rapariz JM, Gonzalez-Herranz P. Anterior endoscopic approach to the thoracolumbar spine. Spine 1998;23:2427-2431
28. Rubino F, Deutsch H, Pamoukian V, et al. Minimally invasive spine surgery: an animal model for endoscopic approach to the anterior cervical and upper thoracic spine. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 2000;10:309-313
29. Dath R, Ebinesan AD, Porter KM, et al. Anatomical measurements of porcine lumbar vertebrae. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007;22:607-613
30. Hockstein NG, Nolan JP, O'Malley BW Jr, et al. Robotic microlaryngeal surgery: a technical feasibility study using the daVinci surgical robot and an airway mannequin. Laryngoscope 2005;115:780-785
31. Hockstein NG, Nolan JP, O'Malley BW Jr, et al. Robot-assisted pharyngeal and laryngeal microsurgery: results of robotic cadaver dissections. Laryngo-scope 2005;115:1003-1008
32. Wiltse LL. The paraspinal sacrospinalis-splitting approach to the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Related Res 1973:48-57.
33. Vialle R, Wicart P, Drain O, et al. The Wiltse paraspinal approach to the lumbar spine revisited: an anatomic study. Clin Orthop 2006;445:175-180
34. Olivier E, Beldame J, Slimane MO, et al. Comparison between one midline cutaneous incision and two lateral incisions in the lumbar paraspinal approach by Wiltse: a cadaver study. Surg Radiol Anat 2006;28:494-497
35. Albayrak A, van Veelen MA, Prins JF, et al. A newly designed ergonomic body support for surgeons. Surg Endosc 2007;21:1835-1840
36. Artibani W, Fracalanza S, Cavalleri S, et al. Learning curve and preliminary experience with da Vinci-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Int 2008;80:237-244
37. Cammisa FP Jr, Girardi FP, Sangani PK, et al. Incidental durotomy in spine surgery. Spine 2000;25:2663-2667
38. Wang JC, Bohlman HH, Riew KD. Dural tears secondary to operations on the lumbar spine. Management and results after a two-year-minimum follow-up of eighty-eight patients. J Bone Joint Surg 1998;80:1728-1732
39. Goodkin R, Laska LL. Unintended "incidental" durotomy during surgery of the lumbar spine: medicolegal implications. Surg Neurol 1995;43:4-12; discussion 12-14
40. Wiese M, Kramer J, Bernsmann K, et al. The related outcome and complication rate in primary lumbar microscopic disc surgery depending on the surgeon's experience: comparative studies. Spine J 2004;4:550-556
41. Satomi K, Ogawa J, Ishii Y, et al. Short-term complications and long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopa-thy. Spine J 2001;1:26-30.
42. Hagen ME, Meehan JJ, Inan I, et al. Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 2008;22:1505-1508
43. Haus BM, Kambham N, Le D, et al. Surgical robotic applications in otolaryngology. Laryngoscope 2003;113:1139-1144
44. Hockstein NG, O'Malley BW Jr, Weinstein GS. Assessment of intraoperative safety in transoral robotic surgery. Laryngoscope 2006;116:165-8.
45. Al-Shawi AK, Fern ED. The tent drape for the C-arm image intensifier. Injury 2004;35:927-929.
46. Biswas D, Bible JE, Whang PG, et al. Sterility of Carm fluoroscopy during spinal surgery. Spine 2008;33:1913-1917
47. Vidovszky TJ, Smith W, Ghosh J, et al. Robotic cholecystectomy: learning curve, advantages, and limitations. J Surg Res 2006;136:172-178