Exploration of robotic-assisted surgical techniques in vascular surgery.

Robotic-assisted surgical approaches for vascular surgery are feasible regarding minimally invasive exposure, dissection, ligation and skeletonization for varicose vein ligation, anterior spine exposure, femoral-popliteal bypass, femoral vein harvest and aortic aneurysm repair. The authors performed a cadaveric exploration to demonstrate proof of concept and feasibility for a robotic-assisted approached. Surgeon autonomy over endoscopic vision, robotic instrumentation and retraction were noted as key benefits over existing open vascular approaches. Robotic-assisted approaches for vascular surgery enable innovative minimally invasive approaches to disease states not amenable to endovascular repair. Potential reductions in paresthesia through nerve identification were noted during a cadaveric exploration for varicose vein ligation in the setting of chronic venous insufficiency. Minimally invasive femoral artery exposure via a retroperitoneal approach could potentially reduce the morbidity associated with the traditional groin incision. Further exploration and procedure refinement are warranted.

Robotically assisted ablation produces more rapid and greater signal attenuation than manual ablation.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic remote catheter ablation potentially provides improved catheter-tip stability, which should improve the efficiency of radiofrequency energy delivery. Percentage reduction in electrogram peak-to-peak voltage has been used as a measure of effectiveness of ablation. We tested the hypothesis that improved catheter-tip stability of robotic ablation can diminish signals to a greater degree than manual ablation. METHODS: In vivo NavX maps of 7 pig atria were constructed. Separate lines of ablation were performed robotically and manually, recording pre- and postablation peak-to-peak voltages at 10, 20, 30, and 60 seconds and calculating signal amplitude reduction. Catheter ablation settings were constant (25W, 50 degrees , 17 mL/min, 20-30 g catheter tip pressure). The pigs were sacrificed and ablation lesions correlated with NavX maps. RESULTS: Robotic ablation reduced signal amplitude to a greater degree than manual ablation (49 +/- 2.6% vs 29 +/- 4.5% signal reduction after 1 minute [P = 0.0002]). The mean energy delivered (223 +/- 184 J vs 231 +/- 190 J, P = 0.42), power (19 +/- 3.5 W vs 19 +/- 4 W, P = 0.84), and duration of ablation (15 +/- 9 seconds vs 15 +/- 9 seconds, P = 0.89) was the same for manual and robotic. The mean peak catheter-tip temperature was higher for robotic (45 +/- 5 degrees C vs 42 +/- 3 degrees C [P < 0.0001]). The incidence of >50% signal reduction was greater for robotic (37%) than manual (21%) ablation (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Robotically assisted ablation appears to be more effective than manual ablation at signal amplitude reduction, therefore may be expected to produce improved clinical outcomes.