Skip to main content
Log in

Effective intracorporeal space in robot-assisted multiquadrant surgery in a pediatric inanimate model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pediatric robot-assisted surgery is technically challenging, but it is becoming the most desirable approach for most of the pediatric urological abdominal surgical procedures. Distance between ports has been adopted based on adult surgery experience. Currently, there is scarce information and literature about effective trocar position and distance between ports for highly complex pediatric multiquadrant surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the most effective way of port placement for pediatric multiquadrant robot-assisted surgery using an inanimate model. Two inanimate models simulating the abdominal area of an older infant were created: model (1) 33.3 × 29.6 × 11.5 cm and model (2) 15 × 13 × 8 cm. A simulation of a robot-assisted laparoscopic Mitrofanoff procedure was performed in both models simulating appendix procurement and subsequent anastomosis to the bladder dome. In the first model, the simulation was performed in two ways: (a) adult trocars were placed with a distance of 4 cm between them and placed longitudinally and (b) ports were placed by triangulating the camera 2 cm in a cephalic fashion. In the second model, (a) scenario was used as described above (c) single port crossing the arms. Volume of the first model was 11,335.32 cm3. Simulation (b) reached higher percentage of volumes without arm clash (30.19 vs. 41.92%, p = 0.021). In the second model with a volume of 1560 cm3, simulation (a) reached a volume percentage of 65.15% without arm clash and allowing the multiquadrant advance, while simulation (c) could not be performed due to arm collision and the inability to advance and see the four quadrants. Triangulation and increasing the distance away from the point of interest improve intracorporeal EWS for multiquadrant complex pediatric surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Batavia JP, Casale P (2014) Robotic surgery in pediatric urology. Curr Urol Rep. 15(5):402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fernandez N, Farhat WA (2019) A comprehensive analysis of robot-assisted surgery uptake in the pediatric surgical discipline. Front Surg 6:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Honda M, Morizane S, Hikita K, Takenaka A (2017) Current status of robotic surgery in urology. Asian J Endosc Surg 10(4):372–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang L, Diaz M, Stricker H, Peabody JO, Menon M, Rogers CG (2017) Adding a newly trained surgeon into a high-volume robotic prostatectomy group: are outcomes compromised? J Robot Surg [Internet] 11(1):69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boysen WR, Gundeti MS (2017) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the pediatric population: a review of technique, outcomes, complications, and special considerations in infants. Pediatr Surg Int 33(9):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cundy TP, Shetty K, Clark J, Chang TP, Sriskandarajah K, Gattas NE et al (2013) The first decade of robotic surgery in children. J Pediatr Surg [Internet] 48(4):858–865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.01.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Autorino R, Eden C, El-Ghoneimi A, Guazzoni G, Buffi N, Peters CA et al (2014) Robot-assisted and laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 65(2):430–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Murthy PB, Schadler ED, Orvieto M, Zagaja G, Shalhav AL, Gundeti MS (2018) Setting up a pediatric robotic urology program: a USA institution experience. Int J Urol 25(2):86–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cundy TP, Marcus HJ, Hughes-Hallett A, Khurana S, Darzi A (2015) Robotic surgery in children: adopt now, await, or dismiss? Pediatr Surg Int [Internet] 31(12):1119–1125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ballouhey Q, Villemagne T, Cros J, Szwarc C, Braik K, Longis B et al (2015) A comparison of robotic surgery in children weighing above and below 15.0 kg: size does not affect surgery success. Surg Endosc 29(9):2643–2650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Finkelstein JB, Levy AC, Silva MV, Murray L, Delaney C, Casale P (2015) How to decide which infant can have robotic surgery? Just do the math. J Pediatr Urol 11:170.e1–170.e4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim SJ, Barlog JS, Akhavan A (2019) Robotic-assisted urologic surgery in infants: positioning, trocar placement, and physiological considerations. Front Pediatr 6:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chang C, Steinberg Z, Shah A, Gundeti MS (2014) Patient positioning and port placement for robot-assisted surgery. J Endourol 28(6):631–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gundeti MS, Acharya SS, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL (2011) Paediatric robotic-assisted laparoscopic augmentation ileocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy (RALIMA): feasibility of and initial experience with the University of Chicago technique. BJU Int [Internet] 107(6):962–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Thakre AA, Bailly Y, Sun LW, Van Meer F, Yeung CK (2008) Is smaller workspace a limitation for robot performance in laparoscopy? J Urol 179(3):1138–1143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Intuitive provided training surgical instruments for the present study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Fernandez.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

For the present manuscript, all authors whose names appear on the submission have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work. All have drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content. Before submission, all authors approved the version to be published; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Authors: Nicolas Fernandez, Catalina Barco-Castillo, Ali ElGhazzaoui and Walid, Farhat declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

No animal or humans were involved in this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fernandez, N., Barco-Castillo, C., ElGhazzaoui, A. et al. Effective intracorporeal space in robot-assisted multiquadrant surgery in a pediatric inanimate model. J Robotic Surg 15, 25–30 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01065-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01065-8

Keywords

Navigation