Proctored adoption of robotic hiatus hernia surgery: outcomes and learning curves in a high-volume UK centre.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of new surgical technologies is inevitably accompanied by a learning curve. With the increasing adoption of robotic techniques in benign foregut surgery, it is imperative to define optimal learning pathways, to ensure a clinically safe introduction of such a technique. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve for robotic hiatal hernia repair with a pre-defined adoption process and proctoring. METHODS: The learning curve was assessed in four surgeons in a high-volume tertiary referral centre, performing over a 100 hiatal hernia repairs annually. The robotic adoption process included simulation-based training and a multi-day wet lab-based course, followed by robotic operations proctored by robotic upper GI experts. CUSUM analysis was performed to assess changes in operating time in sequential cases. RESULTS: Each surgeon (A, B, C and D) performed between 22 and 32 cases, including a total of 109 patients. Overall, 40 cases were identified as 'complex' (36.7%), including 16 revisional cases (16/109, 14.7%). With CUSUM analysis inflection points for operating time were seen after 7 (surgeon B) to 15 cases (surgeon B). CONCLUSION: The learning curve for robotic laparoscopic fundoplication may be as little as 7-15 cases in the setting of a clearly organized learning pathway with proctoring. By integrating these organized learning pathways learning curves may be shortened, ensuring patient safety, preventing detrimental outcomes due to longer learning curves, and accelerating adoption and integration of novel surgical techniques.

Robotic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a European perspective.

Gastrectomy is the mainstay treatment for gastric cancer. To reduce the associated patient burden, minimally invasive gastrectomy was introduced in almost 30 years ago. The increase in the availability of surgical robotic systems led to the first robotic-assisted gastrectomy to be performed in 2002 in Japan. Robotic gastrectomy however, particularly in Europe, has not yet gained significant traction. Most reports to date are from Asia, predominantly containing observational studies. These cohorts are commonly different in the tumour stage, location (particularly with regards to gastroesophageal junctional tumours) and patient BMI compared to those encountered in Europe. To date, no randomised clinical trials have been performed comparing robotic gastrectomy to either laparoscopic or open equivalent. Cohort studies show that robotic gastrectomy is equal oncological outcomes in terms of survival and lymph node yield. Operative times in the robotic group are consistently longer compared to laparoscopic or open gastrectomy, although evidence is emerging that resectional surgical time is equal. The only reproducibly significant difference in favour of robot-assisted gastrectomy is a reduction in intra-operative blood loss and some studies show a reduction in the risk of pancreatic fistula formation.

Systematic review: robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard of care for the treatment of symptomatic gallstone disease. In the context of the increasing uptake of robotic surgery, robotic cholecystectomy has seen a substantial growth over the past decades. Despite this, a formal assessment of the evidence for this practice remains elusive and a randomised controlled trial is yet to be performed. This paper reviews the evidence to date for robotic multiport cholecystectomy compared to conventional multiport cholecystectomy. This systematic review was performed conducted using the Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases; in line with the PRISMA guideline. All articles that compared robotic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. The studies were assessed with regards to operative outcomes, postoperative recovery and complications. Fourteen studies were included, describing a total of 3002 patients. There was no difference in operative blood loss, complication rates, incidence of bile duct injury or length of hospital stay between the robotic and laparoscopic groups. The operative time for robotic cholecystectomy was longer, whereas the risk of conversion to open surgery was lower. There was marked variation in definitions of measured outcomes, and most studies lacked data on training and quality assessment, leading to substantial heterogeneity of the data. Available evidence on multiport robotic cholecystectomy compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy is scarce and the quality of the available studies is generally poor. Results suggest longer operating time for robotic cholecystectomy, although many studies included the learning curve period. Postoperative recovery and complications were similar in both groups.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: past, present and future.

Esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus is increasingly performed using minimally invasive techniques. After the introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the early 1990's, robotic-assisted techniques followed after the turn of the millennium. The advent of robotic platforms has allowed the development of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) over the past 15 years. Although recent trials have shown superior peri-operative morbidity and quality of life compared to open esophagectomy, no randomized trials have compared RAMIE to conventional MIE. This paper summarizes the current literature on RAMIE and provides an overview of expected future developments in robotic surgery.

Single-Admission, Staged Restoration of Gastrointestinal Continuity After Right Gastroepiploic Artery Damage.

A case of iatrogenic right gastroepiploic artery injury during laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy is reported. This case report describes microvascular repair of the right gastroepiploic artery and vein. Subsequent intraoperative decision making with regard to a staged, single-admission successful esophagectomy is discussed. In this case of a single-admission, staged esophagectomy, the gastric conduit was be preserved after transection of the right gastroepiploic artery and vein.

Inter-operator variability in pPOSSUM scores: a note of caution.

PURPOSE: Predicting perioperative morbidity and mortality can be achieved by several risk predicting algorithms. In the UK, the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit, mandated for all patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, uses pPOSSUM as its risk prediction tool. However, there is no literature reporting the inter-operator variability in calculating the score. Inter-rater variability was assessed based on 10 real general surgical cases that went on to have an emergency laparotomy. METHODS: Forty clinicians, 10 each of registrars and consultants in anaesthetics and general surgery, were asked to calculate the pPOSSUM based on the clinical information typically available at the time of making the decision to proceed to emergency laparotomy for the same 10 National Emergency Laparotomy Audit cases. All participants were surveyed to assess their understanding and use of the pPOSSUM score. RESULTS: More than 80% of respondents stated that they use pPOSSUM in daily clinical practice. There was variability in the calculated scores between the groups analysed. Two subgroups were evident: one in which the calculated mean pPOSSUM was similar between participants but did not reflect the true value, and the other which was accurate, but demonstrated high inter-rater variability. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate inter-operator variability in pPOSSUM scores. Previous reports on the validity of the tool fail to account for subjective variation. At a time where pPOSSUM has become a routine part of clinical practice, this variability needs to be accounted for and taken into consideration in the decision-making process.