Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Introduction: Robotic surgery systems have been introduced to deal with the basic disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery. However, working with these systems may lead to time loss due to additional robot-specific tasks, such as set-up of equipment and sterile draping of the system. To evaluate loss o...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2003, Vol.8 (1), p.24-29 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 29 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 24 |
| container_title | Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.) |
| container_volume | 8 |
| creator | Ruurda, Jelle P. Visser, Paul L. Broeders, Ivo A. M. J. |
| description | Introduction: Robotic surgery systems have been introduced to deal with the basic disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery. However, working with these systems may lead to time loss due to additional robot-specific tasks, such as set-up of equipment and sterile draping of the system. To evaluate loss of time in robot-assisted surgery, we compared 10 robot-assisted cholecystectomies to 10 standard laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Materials and Methods: The robot-assisted procedures were performed with the da Vinci telemanipulation system. The total time in the operating room (OR) was scored and divided into preoperative, operative, and postoperative phases. These phases were further divided into smaller timeframes to precisely define moments of time loss.
Results: The most significant difference between the two groups was found in the preoperative phase. Robot-related tasks led to time loss in all time-frames of this phase. In the operative phase, the trocar entry time-frame was longer in robot-assisted cases than in standard procedures. Additionally, postoperative OR clearing was longer in the robot-assisted cases. Total operating time did not differ significantly between the two procedures.
Conclusion: Robot-assisted surgery leads to time loss during preparation of routine laparoscopic procedures. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.3109/10929080309146099 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71494278</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71494278</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-c17b653682b8b42aa3cf48c5da37f0f855ae248cc866df947b06f52883e47ad23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kVFL5DAUhcOirDruD9gXydO-dU2atknXfRkGV4UBRd3ncpveOJG2GZNW6b83szMgi-hDSDh853DvCSHfOfspOCtP40lLpphgJc8KVpZfyGHUZMJ4zvb-vdMkAuqAHIXwyBgrC6G-kgOeSaZknh-Sh3kP7RRsoM7QG-80NqNHem87pLant652QzIPERiwoXejf0A__aIL163Bw2Cfkd4NYzNt4CVEzQXt1lbTxcq1qKdo04PrpmOyb6AN-G13z8jfP-f3i8tkeX1xtZgvEy3iAonmsi5yUai0VnWWAghtMqXzBoQ0zKg8B0yjoFVRNKbMZM0Kk6dKCcwkNKmYkR_b3LV3TyOGoeps0Ni20KMbQyV5VmapVBHkW1DHkYNHU6297cBPFWfVpt3qXbvRc7ILH-sOmzfHrs4I_N4CtjfOd_DifNtUA0yt88ZDr23YZH-cf_affYXQDisNHqtHN_r4U-GT6V4BRUGbQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71494278</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ruurda, Jelle P. ; Visser, Paul L. ; Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ruurda, Jelle P. ; Visser, Paul L. ; Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction: Robotic surgery systems have been introduced to deal with the basic disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery. However, working with these systems may lead to time loss due to additional robot-specific tasks, such as set-up of equipment and sterile draping of the system. To evaluate loss of time in robot-assisted surgery, we compared 10 robot-assisted cholecystectomies to 10 standard laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Materials and Methods: The robot-assisted procedures were performed with the da Vinci telemanipulation system. The total time in the operating room (OR) was scored and divided into preoperative, operative, and postoperative phases. These phases were further divided into smaller timeframes to precisely define moments of time loss.
Results: The most significant difference between the two groups was found in the preoperative phase. Robot-related tasks led to time loss in all time-frames of this phase. In the operative phase, the trocar entry time-frame was longer in robot-assisted cases than in standard procedures. Additionally, postoperative OR clearing was longer in the robot-assisted cases. Total operating time did not differ significantly between the two procedures.
Conclusion: Robot-assisted surgery leads to time loss during preparation of routine laparoscopic procedures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1092-9088</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0150</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3109/10929080309146099</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14708755</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Informa UK Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic - methods ; Female ; Humans ; laparoscopic cholecystectomy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Robotics ; telesurgery ; time analysis ; Time and Motion Studies ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.), 2003, Vol.8 (1), p.24-29</ispartof><rights>2003 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-c17b653682b8b42aa3cf48c5da37f0f855ae248cc866df947b06f52883e47ad23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-c17b653682b8b42aa3cf48c5da37f0f855ae248cc866df947b06f52883e47ad23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14708755$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ruurda, Jelle P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Visser, Paul L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</creatorcontrib><title>Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy</title><title>Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.)</title><addtitle>Comput Aided Surg</addtitle><description>Introduction: Robotic surgery systems have been introduced to deal with the basic disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery. However, working with these systems may lead to time loss due to additional robot-specific tasks, such as set-up of equipment and sterile draping of the system. To evaluate loss of time in robot-assisted surgery, we compared 10 robot-assisted cholecystectomies to 10 standard laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Materials and Methods: The robot-assisted procedures were performed with the da Vinci telemanipulation system. The total time in the operating room (OR) was scored and divided into preoperative, operative, and postoperative phases. These phases were further divided into smaller timeframes to precisely define moments of time loss.
Results: The most significant difference between the two groups was found in the preoperative phase. Robot-related tasks led to time loss in all time-frames of this phase. In the operative phase, the trocar entry time-frame was longer in robot-assisted cases than in standard procedures. Additionally, postoperative OR clearing was longer in the robot-assisted cases. Total operating time did not differ significantly between the two procedures.
Conclusion: Robot-assisted surgery leads to time loss during preparation of routine laparoscopic procedures.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>laparoscopic cholecystectomy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>telesurgery</subject><subject>time analysis</subject><subject>Time and Motion Studies</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1092-9088</issn><issn>1097-0150</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kVFL5DAUhcOirDruD9gXydO-dU2atknXfRkGV4UBRd3ncpveOJG2GZNW6b83szMgi-hDSDh853DvCSHfOfspOCtP40lLpphgJc8KVpZfyGHUZMJ4zvb-vdMkAuqAHIXwyBgrC6G-kgOeSaZknh-Sh3kP7RRsoM7QG-80NqNHem87pLant652QzIPERiwoXejf0A__aIL163Bw2Cfkd4NYzNt4CVEzQXt1lbTxcq1qKdo04PrpmOyb6AN-G13z8jfP-f3i8tkeX1xtZgvEy3iAonmsi5yUai0VnWWAghtMqXzBoQ0zKg8B0yjoFVRNKbMZM0Kk6dKCcwkNKmYkR_b3LV3TyOGoeps0Ni20KMbQyV5VmapVBHkW1DHkYNHU6297cBPFWfVpt3qXbvRc7ILH-sOmzfHrs4I_N4CtjfOd_DifNtUA0yt88ZDr23YZH-cf_affYXQDisNHqtHN_r4U-GT6V4BRUGbQw</recordid><startdate>2003</startdate><enddate>2003</enddate><creator>Ruurda, Jelle P.</creator><creator>Visser, Paul L.</creator><creator>Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</creator><general>Informa UK Ltd</general><general>Taylor & Francis</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2003</creationdate><title>Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy</title><author>Ruurda, Jelle P. ; Visser, Paul L. ; Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-c17b653682b8b42aa3cf48c5da37f0f855ae248cc866df947b06f52883e47ad23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>laparoscopic cholecystectomy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>telesurgery</topic><topic>time analysis</topic><topic>Time and Motion Studies</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ruurda, Jelle P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Visser, Paul L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ruurda, Jelle P.</au><au>Visser, Paul L.</au><au>Broeders, Ivo A. M. J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy</atitle><jtitle>Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle><addtitle>Comput Aided Surg</addtitle><date>2003</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>8</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>24</spage><epage>29</epage><pages>24-29</pages><issn>1092-9088</issn><eissn>1097-0150</eissn><abstract>Introduction: Robotic surgery systems have been introduced to deal with the basic disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery. However, working with these systems may lead to time loss due to additional robot-specific tasks, such as set-up of equipment and sterile draping of the system. To evaluate loss of time in robot-assisted surgery, we compared 10 robot-assisted cholecystectomies to 10 standard laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Materials and Methods: The robot-assisted procedures were performed with the da Vinci telemanipulation system. The total time in the operating room (OR) was scored and divided into preoperative, operative, and postoperative phases. These phases were further divided into smaller timeframes to precisely define moments of time loss.
Results: The most significant difference between the two groups was found in the preoperative phase. Robot-related tasks led to time loss in all time-frames of this phase. In the operative phase, the trocar entry time-frame was longer in robot-assisted cases than in standard procedures. Additionally, postoperative OR clearing was longer in the robot-assisted cases. Total operating time did not differ significantly between the two procedures.
Conclusion: Robot-assisted surgery leads to time loss during preparation of routine laparoscopic procedures.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Informa UK Ltd</pub><pmid>14708755</pmid><doi>10.3109/10929080309146099</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1092-9088 |
| ispartof | Computer aided surgery (New York, N.Y.), 2003, Vol.8 (1), p.24-29 |
| issn | 1092-9088 1097-0150 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71494278 |
| source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Adult Aged Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic - methods Female Humans laparoscopic cholecystectomy Male Middle Aged Robotics telesurgery time analysis Time and Motion Studies Time Factors |
| title | Analysis of Procedure Time in Robot-Assisted Surgery: Comparative Study in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T13%3A03%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Analysis%20of%20Procedure%20Time%20in%20Robot-Assisted%20Surgery:%20Comparative%20Study%20in%20Laparoscopic%20Cholecystectomy&rft.jtitle=Computer%20aided%20surgery%20(New%20York,%20N.Y.)&rft.au=Ruurda,%20Jelle%20P.&rft.date=2003&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=24&rft.epage=29&rft.pages=24-29&rft.issn=1092-9088&rft.eissn=1097-0150&rft_id=info:doi/10.3109/10929080309146099&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71494278%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71494278&rft_id=info:pmid/14708755&rfr_iscdi=true |