“ROBOTIC SURGERY”

A Technical Seminar On

CONTENT

Introduction History Working principle Advantages & Disadvantages Case Study Conclusion Reference

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery: Computer assisted surgery either by Telemanipulator or Computer control.

Robotic surgery is “Robot assisted” surgery, surgeon decides and gives commands robot performs.

LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL SURGERY Large incisions. Large operation time. Surgical marks, scars. Long recovery time. Blood loss.

HISTORY

In 1988 a robot, The PUMA 560, was used to place a needle for a brain biopsy using CT guidance.

In 1987 robotics was used in the first Laparoscopic surgery.

In 1992, The PROBOT, developed at Imperial College London, was used to perform prostatic surgery.

HISTORY

The ROBODOC from Integrated Surgical Systems was introduced in 1992 to mill out precise fittings in the femur for hip replacement.

The da Vinci Surgical System- 2000 ZEUS Robotic Surgical Systems- 2001 Neuro Arm- 2010

WORKING PRINCIPLE

CLASSIFICATION OF ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEMS

1. Supervisory-controlled systems

2. Telesurgical system

3. Shared-control system

SUPERVISORY-CONTROLLED SYSTEM

Most automated type Preparation is needed

before operation. There is a defined

sequence of operations. Robot can’t make

adjustments. Must be supervised.

TELESURGICAL SYSTEMS

Human directed the motion of the robot.

Work at a smaller scale than conventional surgery permits.

SHARED-CONTROL SYSTEM

Shared-control robotic systems aid surgeons during surgery, but the human does most of the work.

Unlike the other robotic systems, the surgeons must operate the surgical instruments themselves.

The robotic system monitors the surgeon's performance and provides stability and support through active constraint.

Active constraint is a concept that relies on defining regions on a patient as one of four possibilities: safe, close, boundary or forbidden.

AESOP ROBOTIC SYSTEM

The AESOP system employs the assistance of the Automated Endoscopic System for optical position.

The AESOP robotic surgical system was very complex. So that it cannot be used in operating rooms.

OVERVIEW

SURGICAL SYSTEM FEATURES

Video console Primary video monitor – 23”W * 23”D Flat panel monitor Surgeon control console Touch screen monitor PC and HERNES control

centers Instrument reusability

Wide array if instruments Quick instruments changes Rapid setup less, then 15 minutes visualization

ADVANTAGES

IN-SURGERYPOST SURGERY

Surgeons have enhanced view Easier to attach nerve endings Surgeons tire less easily Fewer doctors required in

operating rooms In turn, cheaper for hospitals. Smaller risk of infection Less anesthesia required Less loss of blood

Less scarring. Faster recovery time. Tiny incisions. 0% Transfusion rate. Immediate urinary control. Significantly shorter return to

normal activities ( 1-2 weeks). Equal Cancer Cure Rate. Less post operative pain.

DISADVANTAGES

The question of safety. The cost. Success of surgery depends on skill of physician.

not equipment . High maintenance cost.

CASE STUDY

In April 2008, Prof. pier cristoforo giulianotti and his team performed the world’s first minimally invasive liver resection for “living donor transplantation”, removing 60% of patient’s liver, with less pain than surgery due to some five puncture holes and not scar by a surgeon.

CONCLUSION

Robotic systems can successfully replace conventionally laproscopic instruments.

Robotic Technology offers safe and effective operations

Cost effectiveness needs to be further evaluated. Safer since it eliminates possible human errors.

REFERENCE

 

1. Estey, EP (2009). "Robotic prostatectomy: The new standard of care or a marketing success?". Canadian Urological Association Journal 3 (6): 488–90. PMC2792423. PMID 2001998.

2. O'Toole, M. D.; Bouazza-Marouf, K.; Kerr, D.; Gooroochurn, M.; Vloeberghs, M. (2009). "A methodology for design and appraisal of surgical robotic systems". Robotica 28 (2): 297–310.

3. Weinstein, G. S.; o’Malley, B. W.; Snyder, W.; Sherman, E.; Quon, H. (2007). "Transoral Robotic Surgery: Radical Tonsillectomy". Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery 133 (12): 1220–1226. doi:10.1001/archotol.133.12.1220.

4. Kolata, Gina (13 February 2010). "Results Unproven, Robotic Surgery Wins ConvertZ". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 March 2010.

5. Finkelstein J; Eckersberger E, Sadri H, Taneja SS, Lepor H, Djavan B (2010). "Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: The European and US Experience". Reviews in Urology 12 (1): 35–43.

THANK YOU