Volume 5, Issue 4, April – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopy:
THE DA VINCI ® ROBOT
General Principles
Dr Mohammed LAHFAOUI Pr Mohammed Boughaleb Pr Houssine Benhaddou
Depatement of pediatric surgery Departement of Mecatronic Depatement of pediatric surgery
University MED I University MED I University MED I
Oujda, Morocco Oujda, Morocco Oujda, Morocco

Abstract:- Since 1990, laparoscopy and minimally II. BACKGROUND

invasive techniques have revolutionized digestive
surgery. Nevertheless, the use of conventional The initial development of robotics and its surgical
laparoscopy remains limited to procedures of low applications was carried out by NASA and the U.S.
complexity (cholecystectomy, appendectomy) or military, who in the 1970s and 1980s integrated telesurgery
intermediate complexity (fundoplicature, segmental into their research programs with the aim of performing
colectomies). The aim of this article is to present the complex operations remotely, either on war wounded or on
technical characteristics of the da Vinci® robot, and to cosmonauts. These projects quickly led to the parallel
better define its potential applications in digestive development of two robotic systems: the da Vinci® system
surgery. Indeed, if cholecystectomy as well as gastric (of the US Army in collaboration with the Stanford
fundoplicature lend themselves well to robotic surgery, research institute) and the Zeus robot (NASA).8 These two
robotic surgery in these indications does not offer any projects were patented and then marketed separately (da
advantage over classical laparoscopy. The same is Vinci® by Intuitive surgical system and Zeus by Computer
probably not true for more complex procedures such as motion) after receiving the green light from the Food and
gastric bypass or total mesorectal resection. Drug Administration (FDA) in 2001 for their use in
digestive surgery.9
Keywords:- Laparoscopy; Robotic surgery.
Almost simultaneously, the first telerobotic
I. INTRODUCTION transatlantic cholecystectomy (called the Lindbergh
operation) was performed using the Zeus robot in
Over the last twenty years, the development of new September 2001, with the operator in New York and the
technologies has significantly influenced surgical practice, patient in Strasbourg.10 This first operation took place a
often anticipating the demands of evidence-based medicine. few days before the tragic events of September 11 and
So-called "minimally invasive" laparoscopic surgery has unfortunately never received the media attention it
demonstrated its benefits, and sometimes its superiority in deserved. In 2003, the company Computer Motion was
terms of postoperative comfort, over traditional surgery in bought by its competitor, which put an end to the existence
many situations.1-3 However, in some indications, of the robot Zeus and its derivative products. In fact,
laparoscopic surgery has shown its limitations and has been Intuitive surgical system now has an exclusive monopoly
slow to become established in routine clinical practice for on this technology and is working hard to make its profits
several reasons. Firstly, learning laparoscopy is often grow. Today, no less than 500 da Vinci® robots are in use
laborious with prolonged operating times, due to the worldwide (including two in Geneva) and technological
difficulty for the surgeon to find his or her anatomical advances are continuing while awaiting the launch of a new
landmarks on the two-dimensional image provided by the high-definition visualization system this autumn.
camera.4 The mobility of the instruments and the degree of
freedom they allow are limited by the position of the III. THE DA VINCI ® ROBOT\
trocars,5 and finally, the physiological tremor of the
surgeon's hand is amplified by the length of the The da Vinci® robotic system consists of three
instruments.6 In this context, the development of distinct elements: the surgical console (the control station),
robotically assisted surgery has been part of a process the mobile cart (the robot itself) and the imaging tower
aimed at bringing the benefits of laparoscopy to patients, (identical to that used in "classic" laparoscopic surgery).
while overcoming the limitations inherent in this The surgical console represents the surgeon's workspace
approach.7 (figure 1). The surgeon is seated in an ergonomically
optimal position that allows him to control the movements
of the surgical instruments via the electronic circuits
connecting the two joysticks to the arms of the mobile cart.
The console is equipped with a three-dimensional "Insite

IJISRT20APR485 www.ijisrt.com 872

Volume 5, Issue 4, April – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
vision" optical system and two joysticks for remote movements and to operate the unipolar coagulation control
manipulation of the three robot arms (four on the newer (figure 2).
models), as well as a footswitch to manage the camera

Fig 1:- da Vinci Control Panel. The surgeon is comfortably installed, arms supported and eyes "immersed" in the operating field.

Fig 2 :- da Vinci Vision System. Two tri-CCD cameras provide real 3D vision. The hands are in the.

The mobile carriage has three or four arms (on the range of specific instruments is available, all offering seven
most recent model), two are dedicated to the instruments degrees of freedom and thus the possibility of reproducing,
(clamps, coagulators) which have the important in the patient's abdomen, complex movements, such as
characteristic of having an intracorporeal joint, the third those required to perform a digestive anastomosis (figure
arm carrying the camera (figure 3). Each of these arms has 4). All of these instruments can be re-sterilised about ten
several articulations that allow movement of the times, at an average cost of CHF 2,000. which is added to
instruments in all planes of space. In addition, a whole the cost of purchasing the system itself (CHF 1,500,000.) as

IJISRT20APR485 www.ijisrt.com 873

Volume 5, Issue 4, April – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
well as the maintenance costs (about CHF 150,000. per
year).

Finally, the imaging tower consists of a video column,

with two light sources and thus two cameras, to which is
added a CO2 insufflator and a control screen allowing the
instrumentation technician and assistants to follow the
intervention. In summary, the potential advantages of this
robotic system are threefold:
 Increased dexterity due to the presence of seven degrees
of freedom;
 suppression of physiological tremor;
 Three-dimensional vision of the surgical field.

This approach effectively combines the advantages of

laparoscopy and open surgery, with the surgeon feeling as
if he is working with his hands inside the patient's
abdomen, with unlimited possibilities of movement and
perfect vision.

It is therefore logical that the potential benefits of Fig 4:- da Vinci instruments. The 7 degrees of freedom
robotically assisted surgery should be reserved for reproduce those of the human upper limb.
technically difficult procedures or those taking place in
limited spaces. The procedure that has benefited most from IV. THE DA VINCI ® ROBOT IN DIGESTIVE
this technological advance is radical prostatectomy. Current SURGERY
data in the literature are consistent and report simpler
postoperative outcomes, oncologically adequate resection It is now accepted that almost all common digestive
margins, and results in terms of sexual or urinary function surgery procedures can be performed with the da Vinci®
superior to those obtained with either open surgery or robot.11,12 Numerous publications, unfortunately of
conventional laparoscopic surgery. irregular quality, or based on very limited series, report the
experience of several teams for cholecystectomy, bariatric
surgery, or even liver surgery. In fact, the long operating
times (robot set-up can take up to thirty minutes) as well as
cost problems for simple procedures such as
cholecystectomy mean that these procedures will remain in
the exclusive domain of classical laparoscopic surgery for
the long term.13,14

With relation to the Nissen fundoplicature or

splenectomy, there is also growing evidence that the results
of robotic surgery are equivalent to those obtained by
conventional laparoscopy, again with longer operating
times and higher costs.15,16 However, the Heidelberg team
recently presented the results of a randomized prospective
study comparing conventional laparoscopy and robotic-
assisted surgery in the Nissen fundoplicature. The robotic
approach was associated with a shorter operating time, as
the robot set-up could be performed increasingly quickly
(about ten minutes in our institution), thanks to the
experience gained by the operating room team. In fact, it is
certain that these interventions of intermediate complexity
will be useful in the future for the training of surgeons in
robotic surgery. The potential benefits of robotics require
more complex procedures, either because the two-
dimensional visualization of conventional laparoscopy is a
handicap or because the procedure requires manual
Fig 3:- da Vinci Robot "S" with four arms. Latest product anastomosis. Today, two operations meet either of these
from Intuitive Surgical, sold for 1,400,000 euros. requirements: anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal
resection (TME) and gastric bypass.

IJISRT20APR485 www.ijisrt.com 874

Volume 5, Issue 4, April – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
The difficulties associated with TME are well known: especially notable in the latter indication. These
 The need to work in a space (the small pelvis) of small preliminary data justify, in our opinion, continuing our
dimensions; efforts towards an ever-increasing use of the robot in
 The need to obtain sufficient circumferential and distal bariatric surgery.
resection margins to guarantee the quality of the
oncological exeresis; V. THE FUTURE OF ROBOTIC SURGERY
 The need to respect the integrity of the hypogastric
plexus. In the absence of scientifically established data, what
are the arguments that allow us today to affirm that the da
There are therefore two quality criteria for this type of Vinci® robot, despite its prohibitive price, will represent a
surgery, one aimed at improving the vital prognosis, the major technological advance in surgery over the next
other at preserving urogenital function.17 Our preliminary twenty years? First of all, on a conceptual level, the robot
results on a series of seven patients with adenocarcinoma of represents the integration of an information system with a
the rectum confirmed those previously reported by Pigazzi machine capable of finely reproducing the surgeon's
et al.18 Compared with open surgery or conventional movements. In the near future, this system will benefit from
laparoscopy, robotically assisted MCT provides an advances in virtual imaging and will make it possible to
oncologically adequate quality of resection, superior integrate the images obtained by CT scan and thus, for
visualization of the structures of the small pelvis, and post- example, to superimpose a three-dimensional image of the
operative outcomes comparable to minimally invasive patient's liver and the contours of a liver tumour.25,26 It
surgery. will certainly be possible to plan certain tasks of the robot
in advance. It will also be possible to rely on developments
The da Vinci® robot is particularly well suited for in telecommunications, telesurgery and telementoring
performing "hand-assisted" robotically assisted gastro- which will, in the near future, allow an expert to remotely
jejunal or jejuno-jejunal anastomoses. It is therefore not control the movements of a less trained operator.27,28 Last
surprising that gastric bypass for morbid obesity (BMI L but not least, both NASA and the US military continue,
40) is a potentially interesting application of robotics, since thanks to ever increasing budgets, to develop the tools that
it is known that mechanical anastomoses (as performed will be necessary for the optimal use of the robots, as we
today in conventional laparoscopic surgery) are burdened saw during the last "Explorer" mission to Mars.
with significant morbidity either in the short term
(anastomotic leakage) or in the medium term (anastomotic VI. CONCLUSION
stenosis). 19-21 The first cases of obese patients who
underwent gastric bypass by robotic surgery were reported In short, we are at the dawn of a new era in medicine
in 2005, with good results from the outset, both in terms of that will see the application of robotics in surgery. This will
the number of complications and in terms of operating probably be combined with another aspect of surgical
times, often identical or shorter than in conventional progress, namely interventions performed through natural
laparoscopy.22-24 The da Vinci® System was integrated orifices (Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery
into our bariatric surgery program in the summer of 2006 NOTES). However, this will certainly require reducing the
and since then we have not experienced any complications cost of these interventions, by challenging the monopoly
related to gastro-jejunal anastomosis. This encouraging currently held on this technology by American companies
initial experience leads us to believe that the quality of and the US military, another challenge and, certainly not
anastomosis performed with the robot is superior to that the easiest to meet!
performed with the circular staplers commonly used in
conventional laparoscopic surgery. REFERECES

In practice, over the past eighteen months, we have [1]. * Slim K. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the era
been integrating the da Vinci® robot into our surgical of evidence-based medicine. Gastroenterol Clin Biol
activity in the following way: we first familiarised 2001;25:1096-104.
ourselves with this new technology by performing simple [2]. Memon MA. Laparoscopic appendicectomy: Current
procedures such as cholecystectomies, then, having gained status. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1997;79:393-402.
confidence, we used it in operations according to Nissen, or [3]. Bittner R. The standard of laparoscopic
to perform myotomies according to Heller. cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg
2004;389:157-63.
We already feel that this approach allows us to [4]. Schlaerth AC, Abu-Rustum NR. Role of minimally
perform these procedures more comfortably and precisely invasive surgery in gynecologic cancers. Oncologist
than with laparoscopy. Finally, we have developed 2006;11: 895-901.
prospective studies, the protocols of which have been [5]. Rassweiler J, FredeT, Guillonneau B. Advanced
approved by the Ethics Commission of the University laparoscopy. Eur Urol 2002;42:1-12.
Hospitals of Geneva, in order to verify the feasibility and [6]. * Heemskerk J, Zandbergen R, Maessen JG, et al.
safety for the patient of robotics in MCT and gastric Advantages of advanced laparoscopic systems. Surg
bypass. These studies are still in progress, but it now Endosc 2006;20:730-3. Epub 2006.
appears that the benefits of robotically assisted surgery are

IJISRT20APR485 www.ijisrt.com 875

Volume 5, Issue 4, April – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[7]. * Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi, et al. Robot- [26]. * Satava RM. Enseignement de la chirurgie et
assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 2004;91:1390- simulation chirurgicale. World J Surg 2001;25:1484-
7. 9.
[8]. * Broeders IAMJ, Ruurda J. Robotics revolutionizing [27]. * Marescaux J, Rubino F. Téléchirurgie, télémentorat,
surgery: The intuitive surgical Da Vinci ® system. chirurgie virtuelle et télérobotique. Curr Urol Rep
Industrial Robot: An International Journal 2003 ; 4:109-13.
2001;28:387-92. [28]. Sebajang H, Trudeau P, Dougall A, et al. The role of
[9]. Himpens J, Leman G, Cadiere GB. Telesurgical telementoring and telerobotic assistance in the
laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc provision of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in rural
1998;12:1091. areas. Surg Endosc 2006;20:1389-93.line of sight,
[10]. Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, et al. Transatlantic giving the surgeon the impression of plunging them
robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 2001;413:379-80. into the surgical field.
[11]. Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, et al. Robotics
in general surgery - Personal experience in a large
community hospital. Arch Surg 2003;138:777-84.
[12]. * Hanly EJ, Talamini MA. Robotic abdominal
surgery. Am J Surg 2004;188:19S-26S.
[13]. Jacob BP, Winning M. Robotics and general surgery.
Surg Clin North Am 2003 83;6:1405-19.
[14]. Vidovszky TJ, Smith W, Ghosh J, et al. Robotic
cholecystectomy: Learning curve, advantages, and
limitations. J Surg Res 2006;136:172-8.
[15]. * Horgan S, Vanuno D. Robots in laparoscopic
surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A
2001;11:415-9.
[16]. Hanisch E, Markus B, Gutt C, et al [Robot-assisted
laparoscopic cholecystectomy and fundoplication -
initial experiences with the Da Vinci system]. Chirurg
2001;72:286-8.
[17]. ** Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ, et al.
Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer - Consensus of
the european association of endoscopic surgery
(EAES). Surg Endosc 2004;18:1163-85.
[18]. * Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH, et al.
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection
with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg
Endosc 2006;20:1521-5. Epub 2006.
[19]. Suter M, Giusti V, Heraief E, et al. Laparoscopic
Roux-en-Y gastric bypass - Initial 2-year experience.
Surg Endosc 2003;17:603-9.
[20]. ** Sugerman HJ, Kral JG. Evidence-based medicine
reports on obesity surgery: A critique. Int J Obes
2005;29:735-45.
[21]. Higa KD, Boone KB, et al. Complications of the
laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: 1,040 patients
- What have we learned? Obes Surg 2000;10:509-13.
[22]. ** Mohr CJ, Nadzam GS, Alami RS, et al. Totally
Robotic Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass:
Results from 75 patients. Obes Surg 2006;16:690-6.
[23]. Ali MR, BhaskerRao B, Wolfe BM. Robot-assisted
laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc
2005;19:468-72.
[24]. * Yu SC, Clapp BL, Lee MJ, et al. Robotic assistance
provides excellent outcomes during the learning curve
for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass : Results
from 100 robotic-assisted gastric bypasses. Am J Surg
2006;192:746-9.
[25]. * Satava RM. La salle d'opération du futur :
Observations et commentaires. Semin Laparosc Surg
2003;10:99-105.

IJISRT20APR485 www.ijisrt.com 876