» Articles » PMID: 36629070

Laparoscopic Renal Surgery Using Multi Degree-of-freedom Articulating Laparoscopic Instruments in a Porcine Model

Overview
Specialty Urology
Date 2023 Jan 11
PMID 36629070
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the performance of a new multi-degree-of-freedom articulating laparoscopic instrument, ArtiSential, and compared it with that of a straight-shaped instrument and the da Vinci surgical system, in renal surgery using porcine model.

Materials And Methods: Nine female Yorkshire pigs were equally divided into three groups. The three groups were compared at each surgical step in terms of objective and subjective parameters.

Results: The median operative times for renal pedicle clamping and ureter dissection were significantly shorter in ArtiSential group than robotic group (1.3 min vs. 4.7 min, p=0.002; 8.1 min vs. 11.1 min, p=0.015). The median operative time for bladder repair was significantly longer in ArtiSential group than robotic and straight-shaped groups (17.9 min vs. 5.5 min, p=0.002; 17.9 min vs. 9.3 min, p=0.026). There were no significant differences among groups in terms of blood loss or intraoperative complications. ArtiSential device was less useable for renorrhaphy (p=0.009) and bladder repair (p=0.002) compared to the robotic system. ArtiSential group was less accurate than robotic group in terms of tumor resection, renorrhaphy, and bladder repair. During ureter dissection, bladder cuff excision, and bladder repair, the surgeon experienced greater wrist discomfort but lesser back discomfort in ArtiSential group than robotic group.

Conclusions: For most steps, ArtiSential performed as well as robotic and straight-shaped instruments. The development of specialized surgical techniques for ArtiSential will maximize the advantages of these instruments.

Citing Articles

ArtiSential versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter retrospective matched cohort study.

Pyo D, Lee Y, Min B, Lee J, Kim C, Oh H Int J Surg. 2025; 110(12):7630-7635.

PMID: 39806734 PMC: 11634190. DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000002149.


ArtiSential laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative analysis with robotic single-port cholecystectomy.

Rho S, Choi M, Kim S, Hong S, Goh B, Nagakawa Y Ann Surg Treat Res. 2024; 107(6):336-345.

PMID: 39669386 PMC: 11634393. DOI: 10.4174/astr.2024.107.6.336.


The continuing legacy of .

Park K Investig Clin Urol. 2024; 65(6):525-526.

PMID: 39505511 PMC: 11543653. DOI: 10.4111/icu.6506ed.


Evaluation of the suitability of using ArtiSential in various renal surgery: IDEAL stage 1 study.

Kim J, Kang B, Kim Y, Cha Y, Jang M, Bae D BMC Urol. 2024; 24(1):164.

PMID: 39090576 PMC: 11293067. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-024-01539-z.


Initial Experience of Articulating Laparoscopic Instruments for Benign Gynecologic Disease: A Single-Arm Multicenter Prospective Study (Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group 4002).

Noh J, Kim K, Kim T, Kim T, Lee K, Hwang J J Pers Med. 2023; 13(10).

PMID: 37888044 PMC: 10608162. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13101433.

References
1.
Ruurda J, Broeders I, Pulles B, Kappelhof F, van der Werken C . Manual robot assisted endoscopic suturing: time-action analysis in an experimental model. Surg Endosc. 2004; 18(8):1249-52. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-003-9191-9. View

2.
Tuncel A, Lucas S, Bensalah K, Zeltser I, Jenkins A, Saeedi O . A randomized comparison of conventional vs articulating laparoscopic needle-drivers for performing standardized suturing tasks by laparoscopy-naive subjects. BJU Int. 2007; 101(6):727-30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07220.x. View

3.
Lee H, Kim H, Lee S, Hong S, Byun S . Comparison of oncological and perioperative outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic nephroureterectomy approaches in patients with non-metastatic upper-tract urothelial carcinoma. PLoS One. 2019; 14(1):e0210401. PMC: 6324816. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210401. View

4.
Newman M, Musk G, He B . Establishment of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy in a porcine model: techniques and outcomes in 44 pigs. J Surg Res. 2017; 222:132-138. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.09.042. View

5.
Dakin G, Gagner M . Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc. 2003; 17(4):574-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-002-8938-z. View