Comparative early results of a robotics-assisted endoscope holder in single port thoracoscopic surgery in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in surgical instruments have made single-port surgery more widely accepted and lead to a reduced demand for surgical assistants. As COVID-19 has ravaged the world, maintaining minimum medical staffing requirements and proper social distancing have become major topics of interest. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of applying the unisurgeon approach in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery aided by a robotic camera holder. METHODS: Operative time, blood loss, setup time, postoperative hospital stays, and the number of participating surgeons in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resections were gathered for investigation after the introduction of the ENDOFIXexo robotic endoscope holder system. In this cohort, we collected 213 patients who underwent single port video thoracoscope surgery, including 57 patients underwent robotic endoscope arm assisted surgery and case-matched 52 patients in the robotic arm-assisted group with patients in the human-assisted group through propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: In wedge resection, a single surgeon was able to completely operate on all lobes of target lesions. However, for anatomical resections, namely segmentectomy, the success rate was 95%, and for lobectomy, the success rate was only 64%. No significant differences between setup times, blood loss, or operative times between the two groups were observed. CONCLUSIONS: When an experienced uniport surgeon is assisted by a robotic endoscope holder, wedge resection is the most suitable procedure to be performed through unisurgeon single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery without increasing setup time, operative time, or short-term complications. Verification of the technique's applicability for use in anatomic resections requires further investigation.

Evaluation of a remote-controlled laparoscopic camera holder for basic laparoscopic skills acquisition: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Unsteady camera movement and poor visualization contribute to a difficult learning curve for laparoscopic surgery. Remote-controlled camera holders (RCHs) aim to mitigate these factors and may be used to overcome barriers to learning. Our aim was to evaluate performance benefits to laparoscopic skill acquisition in novices using a RCH. METHODS: Novices were randomized into groups using a human camera assistant (HCA) or the FreeHand v1.0 RCH and trained in the (E-BLUS) curriculum. After completing training, a surgical workload questionnaire (SURG-TLX) was issued to participants. RESULTS: Forty volunteers naïve in laparoscopic skill were randomized into control and intervention groups (n = 20) with intention-to-treat analysis. Each participant received up to 10 training sessions using the E-BLUS curriculum. Competency was reached in the peg transfer task in 5.5 and 7.6 sessions for the ACH and HCA groups, respectively (P = 0.015), and 3.6 and 6.8 sessions for the laparoscopic suturing task (P = 0.0004). No significance differences were achieved in the circle cutting (P = 0.18) or needle guidance tasks (P = 0.32). The RCH group experienced significantly lower workload (P = 0.014) due to lower levels of distraction (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Remote-controlled camera holders have demonstrated the potential to significantly benefit intra-operative performance and surgical experience where camera movement is minimal. Future high-quality studies are needed to evaluate RCHs in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 83733979.

A Robotic Camera Holder Controlled by Head Movements: Exploring This New Robot-Surgeon Interface.

Background. Most robotic camera steering devices (RCSDs) require active steering by the surgeon and necessarily increase workload. Clinical experience shows that standard laparoscopic procedures can be performed safely as solo surgery aided by RCSDs. No evidence exists concerning exploratory or emergency procedures. We compared the performance during unexpected laparoscopic tasks on surgical simulators aided either by an RCSD controllable by head movements of the surgeon or by a human camera assistant. Methods. Forty-five medical students without previous experience with minimal invasive surgery were randomized in 2 groups, and they performed standard and unexpected laparoscopic tasks requiring complex camera movements on box trainers either using an RCSD or assisted by a human camera assistant. Efficiency and performance parameters were recorded. Results. Performance in simulated standard procedures was equivalent. In simulated exploratory procedures, we saw significantly better performance scores in the conventional group versus the RCSD group. The strongest factor for these differences was the longer camera-adjusting time in the RCSD group versus the conventional group (PEG task = 208 ± 51 seconds vs 170 ± 36 seconds, P = .005; suture task = 563 ± 126 seconds vs 454 ± 201 seconds, P = .041). Conclusion. These results, obtained on surgical simulators, indicate that the solo approach to standard surgical tasks, facilitated by an RCSD controllable by head movements, can most likely be viewed as safe. Exploratory procedures with a relevant chance for complications or procedures that require rapid, often, or complex camera movements should rather be performed with a human camera assistant.

Use of a robotic camera holder (FreeHand®) for laparoscopic appendicectomy.

Introduction: Use of a mechanical arm to hold the laparoscopic camera has many advantages. FreeHand® (FreeHand Ltd, Guildford, United Kingdom) is a robotic camera holder which uses head movement and infrared technology. This trial assessed the usefulness of FreeHand® in laparoscopic appendicectomy.Material and methods: This was a single center prospective cohort study on patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy using FreeHand®. Patient demographics, operative details, conversion to human camera holder and surgeon discomfort were recorded. Utilization of assistant time while not assisting was also recorded.Results: Twenty-two participants were included, with a mean age of 32 years and a mean BMI of 25.3. The mean set up time was nine minutes. There were five conversions to a manual camera holder (22.7%). There were 22 lens cleaning episodes with nine (40.9%) not requiring any lens cleaning and six (27.3%) requiring one clean. There were no peri-operative complications. Most surgeons reported minimal or no discomfort. Assistant's time was used for ward work (57%), clerking patients (36%) and for a break (7%).Conclusions: FreeHand® can be safely used in laparoscopic appendicectomy. It provides a stable image, puts the surgeon in control of the surgical field, causes minimal user discomfort, and frees up personnel.