Paper detail

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

Purpose: To report the feasibility and the safety of a surgeon-controlled robotic endoscope holder in laparoscopic surgery. Materials and methods: From March 2010 to September 2010, 20 patients were enrolled prospectively to undergo a laparoscopic surgery using an innovative robotic endoscope holder. Two surgeons performed 6 adrenalectomies, 4 sacrocolpopexies, 5 pyeloplasties, 4 radical prostatectomies and 1 radical nephrectomy. Demographic data, overall set-up time, operative time, number of assistants needed were reviewed. Surgeon's satisfaction regarding the ergonomics was assessed using a ten point scale. Postoperative clinical outcomes were reviewed at day 1 and 1 month postoperatively. Results: The per-protocol analysis was performed on 17 patients for whom the robot was effectively used for surgery. Median age was 63 years, 10 patients were female (59%). Median BMI was 26.8. Surgical procedures were completed with the robot in 12 cases (71 %). Median number of surgical assistant was 0. Overall set-up time with the robot was 19 min, operative time was 130 min) during which the robot was used 71% of the time. Mean hospital stay was 6.94 days $\pm$ 2.3. Median score regarding the easiness of use was 7. Median pain level was 1.5/10 at day 1 and 0 at 1 month postoperatively. Open conversion was needed in 1 case (6 %) and 4 minor complications occurred in 2 patients (12%). Conclusion: This use of this novel robotic laparoscope holder is safe, feasible and it provides a good comfort to the surgeon.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.