First Clinical Experience in Urologic Surgery with a Novel Robotic Lightweight Laparoscope Holder

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 58-63

  Long, Jean Alexandre ^a   Tostain, Jacques ^b   Lanchon, Cecilia ^a   Voros, Sandrine ^c   Medici, Maud ^a   Descotes, Jean Luc ^a   Troccaz, Jocelyne ^c   Cinquin, Philippe ^c   Rambeaud, Jean Jacques ^a   Moreau Gaudry, Alexandre ^a  

^a GRENOBLE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ JEAN MONNET   (France)

^c LABORATOIRE TIMC IMAG   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADRENALECTOMY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONVERSION TO OPEN SURGERY; ERGONOMICS; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPE; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; NEPHRECTOMY; OPERATING ROOM PERSONNEL; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATECTOMY; PYELOPLASTY; RATING SCALE; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS; SURGEON; SURGICAL PATIENT; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADRENALECTOMY; AGED; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPES; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHRECTOMY; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROBOTICS; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84872339233     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: 1557900X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2012.0357     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-Assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 2009;55:1037-1063.
2. Berkelman P, Cinquin P, Boidard E, et al. Development and testing of a compact endoscope manipulator for minimally invasive surgery. Comput Aided Surg 2005;10:1-13.
3. Long JA, Cinquin P, Troccaz J, et al. Development of miniaturized light endoscope-holder robot for laparoscopic surgery. J Endourol 2007;21:911-914.
4. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-213.
5. Jaspers JE, Breedveld P, Herder JL, Grimbergen CA. Camera and instrument holders and their clinical value in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2004;14:145-152.
6. Long JA, Cinquin P, Troccaz J, et al. [Preclinical development of the TIMC LER (light endoscope robot)]. (Fre) Prog Urol 2006;16:45-51.
7. Gumbs AA, Crovari F, Vidal C, et al. Modified robotic lightweight endoscope (ViKY) validation in vivo in a porcine model. Surg Innov 2007;14:261-264.
8. Polet R, Donnez J. Gynecologic laparoscopic surgery with a palm-Controlled laparoscope holder. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004;11:73-78.
9. Polet R, Donnez J. Using a laparoscope manipulator (LAPMAN) in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Surg Technol Int 2008;17:187-191.
10. Wagner AA, Varkarakis IM, Link RE, et al. Comparison of surgical performance during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy of two robotic camera holders, EndoAssist and AESOP: A pilot study. Urology 2006;68:70-74.
11. Mettler L, Ibrahim M, Jonat W. One year of experience working with the aid of a robotic assistant (the voicecontrolled optic holder AESOP) in gynaecological endoscopic surgery. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2748-2750.
12. Arezzo A, Schurr MO, Braun A, et al. Experimental assessment of a new mechanical endoscopic solosurgery system: Endofreeze. Surg Endosc 2005;19:581-588.
13. Aiono S, Gilbert JM, Soin B, et al. Controlled trial of the introduction of a robotic camera assistant (EndoAssist) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2002;16:1267-1270.
14. Tchartchian G, Dietzel J, Bojahr B, et al. Decreasing strain on the surgeon in gynecologic minimally invasive surgery by using semi-Active robotics. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2011;112: 72-75.