Robotics in urological surgery: Review of current status and maneuverability, and comparison of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopy

References

• Hemal AK, Menon M. Laparoscopy, robot, telesurgery and urology: Future perspective. J Postgrad Med 2002; 48: 39–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nguyen MM, Das S. The evolution of robotic urologic surgery. Urol Clin North Am 2004; 31(4)653–658
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yokokohji Y, Yoshikawa T. Bilateral control of master-slave manipulators for ideal kinesthetic coupling – formulation and experiment. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 1994; 10(5)605–20
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Full RJ, Kubow T, Schmitt J, Holmes P, Koditschek D. Quantifying dynamic stability and maneuverability in legged locomotion. Integr Comp Biol 2002; 42: 149–157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannan MW, Walker ID. Kinematics and the implementation of an elephant's trunk manipulator and other continuum style robots. Journal of Robotic Systems 2003; 20(2)45–63
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robinson G, Davies JBC. Continuum robots – a state of the art. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, May 1999. pp 2849–2854.
   Google Scholar
• Troccaz J, Delnondedieu Y. Semi-active guiding systems in surgery. A two-DOF prototype of the passive arm with dynamic constraints. Mechatronics 1996; 6: 399–421
   Google Scholar
• Stoianovici D, Webster R, Kavoussi L. Robotic tools for minimally invasive urologic surgery. In: Complications of Urologic Laparoscopic Surgery: Recognition, Management and Prevention. December 2002. citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.125.4437&rep=rep1&type=pdf
   Google Scholar
• Min HJ, Lim HJ, Kim SH. A new impact actuator using linear momentum exchange of inertia mass. J Med Eng Technol 2002; 26(6)265–269
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Canes D, Lehman AC, Farritor SM, Oleynikov D, Desai MM. The future of NOTES instrumentation: Flexible robotics and in vivo minirobots. J Endourol 2009; 23(5)787–792
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degani A, Choset H, Zubiate B, Ota T, Zenati M. Highly articulated robotic probe for minimally invasive surgery. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2006), Orlando, FL, May 2006. pp 4167–4172.
   Google Scholar
• Dombre E, Poignet P, Pierrot F, Duchemin G, Urbain L. Intrinsically safe active robotic systems for medical applications. In: Proceedings of the First IARP/IEEE-RAS Joint Workshop on Technical Challenge for Dependable Robots in Human Environment, Seoul, Korea, May 2001. Paper III-4. http://www.lirmm.fr/manifs/UEE/docs/dombre/pdf/IARP.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Guillonneau B. What robotics in urology? A current point of view. Eur Urol 2003; 43: 103–105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fite KB, Speich JE, Goldfarb M. Transparency and stability robustness in two-channel bilateral telemanipulation. ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 2001; 123: 400–407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence DA. Stability and transparency in bilateral teleoperation. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 1993; 9(5)624–637
   Google Scholar
• Singh I, Hemal AK. Role of robot-assisted pelvic surgery. Scientific World Journal 2009; 12(9)479–489
   Google Scholar
• Desai MM, Aron M, Gill IS, Pascal-Haber G, Ukimura O, Kaouk JH, Stahler G, Barbagli F, Carlson C, Moll F. Flexible robotic retrograde renoscopy: Description of novel robotic device and preliminary laboratory experience. Urology 2008; 72(1)42–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozer P, Leroy A, Payan Y, Troccaz J, Chartier-Kastler E, Richard F. Computer assisted access to the kidney. Int J Med Robot 2005; 1(4)58–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoianovici D, Cleary K, Patriciu A, Mazilu D, Stanimir A, Craciunoiu N, Watson V, Kavoussi L. AcuBot: A robot for radiological interventions. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 2003; 19: 927–930
   Google Scholar
• Stoianovici D, Whitcomb LL, Anderson JH, Taylor RH, Kavoussi LR. A modular surgical robotic system for image guided percutaneous procedures. In: Wells WM, Colchester A, Delp S. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI ’98), Cambridge, MA, October 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1496. Berlin: Springer; 1998. pp 404–410.
   Google Scholar
• Macura KJ, Stoianovici D. Advancements in magnetic resonance-guided robotic interventions in the prostate. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 19(6)297–304
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stoianovici D. URobotics – Urology robotics at Johns Hopkins. Comput Aided Surg 2001; 6: 360–369
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davies B. A review of robotics in surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng 2000; 214: 129–140
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulose BK, Kutka MF, Mendoza-Sagaon M, Barnes AC, Yang C, Taylor RH, Talamini MA. Human vs robotic organ retraction during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Surg Endosc 1999; 13(5)461–465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett AR, Davies BL, Gomes MP, Harris SJ, Henckel J, Jakopec M, Kannan V, Rodriguez y Baena FM, Cobb JP. Computer-assisted hip resurfacing surgery using the Acrobot navigation system. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2007; 221(7)773–785
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li QH, Zamorano L, Pandya A, Perez R, Gong J, Diaz F. The application accuracy of the NeuroMate robot – a quantitative comparison with frameless and frame-based surgical localization systems. Comput Aided Surg 2002; 7: 90–98
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yavuz Y, Ystgaard B, Skogvoll E. A comparative experimental study evaluating the performance of surgical robots AESOP and EndoAssist. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2000; 10: 163–167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federspil PA, Geisthoff UW, Henrich D. Development of the first force-controlled robot for otoneurosurgery. Laryngoscope 2003; 113: 465–471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler JR, Jr, Chang SD, Murphy MJ. The CyberKnife: A frameless robotic system for radiosurgery. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 1997; 69: 124–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arambula Cosio F, Davies BL. Automated prostate recognition: A key process for clinically effective robotic prostatectomy. Med Biol Eng Comput 1999; 37: 236–243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner AA, Varkarakis IM, Link RE, Sullivan W, Su LM. Comparison of surgical performance during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy of two robotic camera holders, EndoAssist and AESOP: A pilot study. Urology 2006; 68(1)70–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yokokohji Y, Yoshikawa T. Bilateral control of master-slave manipulators for ideal kinesthetic coupling-formulation and experiment. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 1994; 10: 605–620
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M. Transatlantic robot-assisted tele-surgery. Nature 2001; 413: 379–380
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• www.intuitivesurgical.com/products/davincissurgicalsystem
   Google Scholar
• Singh I, Hemal AK. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in 2010. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2010; 10: 671–682
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhandari M, Menon M. Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy (VIP) and current results. Arch Esp Urol 2007; 60(4)397–407
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Singh I. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Current review of the technique and literature. J Minim Access Surg 2009; 5(4)87–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davis JW, Castle EP, Pruthi RS, Ornstein DK, Guru KA. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: An expert panel review of the current status and future direction. Urol Oncol 2010; 28(5)480–486
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh I. Robot-assisted pelvic lymphadenectomy for bladder cancer – where have we reached by 2009. Urology 2010; 75(6)1269–1274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Shoma AM, Abol-Ein H, Ghoneim MA. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in female patients: Technique with preservation of the uterus and vagina. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 198(3)386–393
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemal AK. Role of robot-assisted surgery for bladder cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2009; 19(1)69–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasraeian A, Barret E, Cathelineau X, Rozet F, Galiano M, Sanchez-Salas R, Vallancien G. Robot-assisted laparoscopic cystoprostatectomy with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy, extracorporeal enterocystoplasty, and intracorporeal enterourethral anastomosis: Initial Montsouris experience. J Endourol 2010; 24(3)409–413
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemal AK. Robotic and laparoscopic radical cystectomy in the management of bladder cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2009; 10(1)45–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guru KA, Perlmutter AE, Butt ZM, Piacente P, Wilding GE, Tan W, Kim HL, Mohler JL. The learning curve for robot-assisted radical cystectomy. JSLS 2009; 13(4)509–514
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin AD, Nunez RN, Pacelli A, Woods ME, Davis R, Thomas R, Andrews PE, Castle EP. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Intermediate survival results at a mean follow-up of 25 months. BJU Int 2010; 105(12)1706–1709
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh I, Hemal AK. Robot-assisted pyeloplasty: Review of the current literature, technique and outcome. Can J Urol 2010; 17(2)5099–5108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashizume M, Konishi K, Tsutsumi N. A new era of robotic surgery assisted by a computer-enhanced surgical system. Surgery 2002; 131: S330–S333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhayani SB, Link RE, Varkarakis JM, Kavoussi LR. Complete da Vinci versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty: Cost analysis. J Endourol 2005; 19(3)327–332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavery HJ, Thaly R, Albala D, Ahlering T, Shalhav A, Lee D, Fagin R, Wiklund P, Dasgupta P, Costello AJ, et al. Robotic equipment malfunction during robotic prostatectomy: A multi-institutional study. J Endourol 2008; 22(9)2165–2168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ham WS, Park SY, Yu HS, Choi YD, Hong SJ, Rha KH. Malfunction of da Vinci robotic system – disassembled surgeon's console hand piece: Case report and review of the literature. Urology 2009; 73(1)209.e7–209.e8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kozlowski PM, Porter CR, Corman JM. Mechanical failure rate of da Vinci robotic system: Implications for pre-op patient counselling. J Urol 2006; 175(Suppl)372–373
   Google Scholar
• Borden LS, Jr, Kozlowski PM, Porter CR, Corman JM. Mechanical failure rate of da Vinci robotic system. Can J Urol 2007; 14(2)3499–3501
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eichel L, Ahlering TE, Clayman RV. Robotics in urologic surgery: Risks and benefits. AUA Update Series 2005; 24: 106–111
   Google Scholar
• Zorn KC, Gofrit ON, Orvieto MA, Mikhail AA, Galocy RM, Shalav AL. Da Vinci robot error and failure rates: Single institution experience on a single three-arm robot unit of over 700 consecutive robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol 2007; 21(11)1341–1344
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andonian S, Okeke Z, Okeke DA, Rastinehad A, Vanderbrink BA, Richstone L, Lee BR. Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: A comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol 2008; 15(1)3912–3916
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar