medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-2945 (Print)

2017, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Revista Cubana de Cirugía 2017; 56 (1)

Present time of the robotic surgery

Pereira FJG

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 50-61
PDF size: 131.00 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Robotic surgery is already a reality. Although surgery history dates back from more than 2000 years, the last two decades of the twentieth century have shown a marked revolution in medicine, due to all the changes it has caused in the way of doing, teaching and practicing surgery.
Objective: To present general and current aspects of robotics applied to medicine and especially to surgery, as well as the impact of robotic surgery in medical teaching.
Methods: A systematic review was carried out based on the consultation of indexed scientific articles related to the topic. The sources of information consulted were PubMed, Ebsco and Scielo. The information was analyzed and chosen in correspondence with the topic and objectives.
Results: Robotic surgery has evolved into a separate field with enormous potential for its present and future development. The robots used for this type of surgeries have had a great acceptance among the scientific community, for the significant advantages, such as the possibility to arrive at body areas a human could not arrive and act on.
Conclusions: This review shows that robotic technology is able to offer patients satisfactory outcomes and adequate treatment. This guarantees a much lower intervention risk and an optimum recovery in the shortest possible time, creating very effective programs for their learning.


REFERENCES

  1. Sánchez-Martín FM, Jiménez Schlegl P, Millán Rodríguez F, Salvador-Bayarri J, Monllau Font V, Palou Redorta J, et al. Historia de la robótica: de Arquitas de Tarento al Robot da Vinci (Parte II). Actas Urol Esp [Internet]. 2007 [citado 20 oct 2016]; 31(3):185-96. Disponible en: http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0210- 48062007003300002&nrm=iso

  2. Galeano D. Robótica Médica. Universidad católica Nuestra señora de Asunción [Internet]. 2012 [citado 20 oct 2016];22(1):21. Disponible en: http://jeuazarru.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/robotica_medicinal.pdf

  3. Lucena Olavarrieta JR, Coronel P, Orellana Pérez s. Historia, evolución, estado actual y futuro de la cirugía robótica. Rev Fac Med [Internet]. 2007 [citado 20 oct 2016];30(2):109-14. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.ve/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0798- 04692007000200002&nrm=iso

  4. Morris B. Robotic surgery: applications, limitations, and impact on surgical education. MedGenMed [Internet]. 2005 [citado 2016 oct 20];7(3):72. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1681689/

  5. Olweny EO, Park SK, Tan YK, Gurbuz C, Cadeddu JA, Best SL. Perioperative comparison of robotic assisted laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) pyeloplasty versus conventional LESS pyeloplasty. European urology [Internet]. 2012 [citado 2016 oct 20];61(2):410-4. Disponible en: https://www.clinicalkey.es/#!/content/journal/1-s2.0-S0302283811011304

  6. Valero R, Ko YH, Chauhan S, Schatloff O, Sivaraman A, Coelho RF, et al. Cirugía robótica: Historia e impacto en la enseñanza. Actas Urol Esp [Internet]. 2011 [ciatdo 20 oct 2016];35(9):540-5. Disponible en: https://www.clinicalkey.es/#!/content/journal/1-s2.0-S0210480611001902

  7. Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, Crouzet S, Desai MM, Gill IS. Single-port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology [Internet]. 2008 [citado 2016 oct 20];72(6):1190-3. Disponible en: https://www.clinicalkey.es/#!/content/journal/1- s2.0-S0090429508007449

  8. Kaouk JH, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Han DH, Lee SW, Yinghao S, et al. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1076 cases. European urology [Internet]. 2011 [citado 2016 oct 20];60(5):998-1005. Disponible en: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.002

  9. White MA, Autorino R, Spana G, Laydner H, Hillyer SP, Khanna R, et al. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy: surgical technique and comparative outcomes. European urology [Internet]. 2011 [citado 2016 oct 20];59(5):815-22. Disponible en: https://www.clinicalkey.es/#!/content/journal/1- s2.0-S0302283811001217

  10. Castillo C OA, Vidal M I. Cirugía robótica. Rev Chil Cir [Internet]. 2012 [citado 20 oct 2016];64(1):88-91. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718- 40262012000100016&nrm=iso

  11. Pai A, Melich G, Marecik SJ, Park JJ, Prasad LM. Current status of robotic surgery for rectal cancer: A bird's eye view. J Minim Access Surg [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2016 oct 20];11(1):29-34. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290115/

  12. Aly EH. Robotic colorectal surgery: summary of the current evidence. Int J Colorectal Dis [Internet]. 2014 [ciatdo 2016 oct 20];29(1):1-8. Disponible en: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00384-013-1764-z

  13. Giza DE, Tudor S, Purnichescu-Purtan RR, Vasilescu C. Robotic splenectomy: what is the real benefit? World J Surg [Internet]. 2014 [ciatdo 2016 oct 20]; 38(12):3067-73. Disponible en: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00268-014-2697-6

  14. Vasilescu C, Stanciulea O, Tudor S. Laparoscopic versus robotic subtotal splenectomy in hereditary spherocytosis. Potential advantages and limits of an expensive approach. Surgical endoscopy [Internet]. 2012 [citado 2016 oct 20]; 26(10):2802-9. Disponible en: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00464-012-2249-9

  15. Health Quality O. Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gynecologic and Urologic Oncology: An Evidence-Based Analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser [Internet]. 2010 [ciatdo 2016 oct 20];10(27):1-118. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3382308/

  16. Kumar A, Asaf BB. Robotic thoracic surgery: The state of the art. J Minim Access Surg [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2016 oct 20];11(1):60-7. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290121/

  17. Park YM, Kim WS, Byeon HK, Lee SY, Kim SH. Oncological and functional outcomes of transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal cancer. The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery [Internet]. 2013 [ciatdo 2016 oct 20];51(5):408-12. Disponible en: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266435612005268

  18. Kolata G. Results Unproven, Robotic Surgery Wins Converts. The New York Times. 2010 FEB 13 [En Internet] [citado 2016 oct 20]. Disponible en: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/health/14robot.htm




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com