Download PDF
Aktuelle Urol 2018; 49(06): 488-499
DOI: 10.1055/a-0741-6692
Übersicht
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Zukunft der Laparoskopie und Robotik in der Urologie

The future of laparoscopy and robotics in urology
Jens Rassweiler
1   SLK-Kliniken Heilbronn GmbH, Urologie, Heilbronn
,
Ali S. Goezen
1   SLK-Kliniken Heilbronn GmbH, Urologie, Heilbronn
,
Jan-Thorsten Klein
2   Urologische Universitätsklinik Ulm, Klinik für Urologie, Ulm
,
Marie-Claire Rassweiler-Seyfried
3   Urologische Universitätsklinik Mannheim, Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Mannheim
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
06 December 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Robotik hat die klassische Laparoskopie in den letzen Jahren etwas an den Rand gedrängt. Dennoch hat sich auch die Laparoskopie und Retroperitoneoskopie in den letzten Jahren technologisch weiterentwickelt mit 4K-Ultra-HD-Videotechnologie, 3D-HD-Videosystemen, miniaturisierten Instrumenten, modernen Schneid- und Koagulationsverfahren, Instrumenten mit 7 Freiheitsgraden und ergnomischen Plattformen Ethos Chair®. Aufgrund der auslaufendenden Patente von Intuitive Surgical wird ab 2019 eine Konkurrenzsituation mit neuen Herstellern von Operationsrobotern existieren. Diese müssen erst belegen, ob sie den hohen Qualitätsstandard der Da-Vinci-Serie (SI, X, XI) bieten können. Dies betrifft die Art der Konsole, Anordnung der Roboterarme, Technologie des 3D-Videosystems und Qualität und Freiheitsgrade der Endeffektoren. Robotersysteme für die Endourologie sind Avicenna Roboflex® für die flexible Ureteroskopie und AquaBeam®-System für die Roboter-assistierte Aquaablation der Prostata. Während Roboflex ähnlich dem Da-Vinci-System die Ergonomie des Eingriffes erleichtert, ersetzt die robotergestützte Aquaablation erstmals den Operateur.

Abstract

The introduction of robotics led to a decrease in the importance of classical laparoscopy. Nevertheless laparoscopy and retroperitoneoscopy underwent significant technological improvements during the last decade, including introduction of 4k Ultra HD video technology, 3D-HD-videosystems, minaturised instruments, advanced sealing devices, instruments with 7 degrees of freedom, and ergonomic platforms Ethos Chair®. The monopoly of robotic surgical devices will end in 2019, because key patents of Intuitive Surgical will expire. This will lead to an interesing competition among new manufacturers of robotic surgical devices, which however have to prove that they meet the high quality standard of the current da Vinci series, such as type of console, arrangement of robotic arms, technology of 3D-videosystem, and quality and degrees of freedom of end effectors. There are also robotic systems used in endourology: Avicenna Roboflex® and the AquaBeam®-System for robot-assisted aquablation therapy of the prostate. While Roboflex improves the ergonomics of flexbile ureteroscopy, AquaBeam may for the first time eliminate the surgeon.

Schlüsselwörter

chirurgische Roboter - Laparoskopie - Endourologie - robotische flexible Ureteroskopie - robotische TURP

Keywords

surgical robots - laparoscopy - endourology - robotic flexible ureteroscopy - robotic TURP
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Rassweiler JJ, Teber D. Advances in laparoscopic surgery in urology. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 70: 387-399
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rassweiler J, Binder J, Frede T. Robotic and telesurgery: will they change our future. Curr Opin Urol 2001; 11: 309-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Teber D, Baumhauer M, Guven EO. et al. Robotics and imaging in urological surgery. Curr Opin Urol 2009; 19: 108-113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rassweiler JJ, Autorino R, Klein J. et al. Future of robotic surgery in urology. BJU Int 2017; 120: 822-841
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Rassweiler JJ, Goezen AS, Rassweiler-Seyfried MC. et al. Roboter in der Urologie – eine Analyse gegenwärtiger und zukünftiger Gerätegenerationen. Urologe A 2018; 57: 1075-1090
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Leal Ghezzi T, Campos Corleta O. 30 years of robotic surgery. World J Surg 2016; 40: 2550-2557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Saglam R, Muslumanoglu AY, Tokatli Z. et al. A new robot for flexible ureteroscopy: Development and early clinical results (IDEAL Stage 1-2b). Eur Urol 2014; 66: 1092-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rassweiler J, Fiedler M, Charalampogiannis N. et al. Robot-assisted flexible ureteroscopy: an update. Urolithisasis 2018; 46: 69-77
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Harris SJ, Arambula-Cosio F, Mei Q. et al. The Probot – an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 1997; 211 : 317-325
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Gilling P, Reuther R, Kahokehr A. et al. Aquablation – image-guided robot-assisted water-jet ablation. BJU Int 2016; 117: 923-929
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kelling G. Über die Oesophagoskopie, Gastroskopie und Koelioskopie. Münch med Wschr 1901; 49: 21-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Semm K. Endoscopic appendicectomy. Endoscopy 1983; 15: 59-64
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Perissat J, Collet D, Belliard R. Gallstones: laparoscopic treatment – cholecystectomy, cholecystostomy, and lithotripsy. Our own technique. Surg Endoscopy 1990; 4: 1-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cortesi N, Ferrari P, Zambarda E. et al. Diagnosis of bilateral abdominal cryptorchidism by laparoscopy. Endoscopy 1976; 8: 33-34
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991; 146: 278-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gaur D. Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy. J Urol 1992; 148: 1137-1139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Rassweiler JJ, Henkel TO, Stock Ch. et al. Retroperitoneale laparoskopische Nephrektomie (RLN) und andere retroperitoneoskopische Eingriffe – Technik und erste Ergebnisse. Akt Urol 1994; 25: 154-166
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: The Montsouris technique. J Urol 2000; 163: 1643-1649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Rassweiler J, Sentker L, Seemann O. et al. Laparoskopische radikale Prostatektomie – Technik und erste Erfahrungen. Akt Urol 2000; 31: 238-247
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rassweiler J, Godin K, Goezen AS. et al. Radikale Zystektomie – pro laparoskopisch. Urologe A 2012; 51: 671-678
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001; 87: 408-410
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Schurr MO, Buess G, Neisius B. et al. Robotics and telemanipulation technologies for endoscopic surgery. A review of the ARTEMIS project. Surg Endosc 2000; 14: 375-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Reichenspurner H, Damiano R, Mack M. et al. Use of the voice-controlled surgical system ZEUS for endoscopic coronary bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 118: 11-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mohr FW, Falk V, Diegeler A. et al. Computer-enhanced coronary artery surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 117: 1212-1215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M. et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 2001; 413: 379-380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A. et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002; 168: 945-949
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Imkamp F, Herrmann TR, Stolzenburg JU. et al. Development of urologic laparoscopy in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: a survey among urologists. World J Urol 2014; 32: 1363-1374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Cicione A, Autorino R, Laguna MP. et al. Three-dimensional Technology Facilitates Surgical Performance of Novice Laparoscopy Surgeons: A Quantitative Assessment on a Porcine Kidney Model. Urology 2015; 85: 1252-1256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Bertolo R, Checcucci E, Amparore D. et al. Current status of 3D Laparoscopy in urology: An ESUT systematic review and cumulative analysis. J Endourol 2018; [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0374.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tokas T, Goezen AS, Avgeris M. et al. Combining of ETHOS operating ergonomic platform, three-dimensional laparoscopic camera and Radius Surgical System manipulators improves ergonomy in urologic laparoscopy: Comparison with conventioneal laparoscopy and da Vinci in a pelvi trainer. Eur Urol Focus 2017; 3: 413-420
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Rassweiler JJ, Henkel TO, Potempa DM. et al. Die Technik der transperitonealen laparoskopischen Nephrektomie (TLN) – experimentelle Grundlagen und erste klinische Erfahrungen. Akt Urol 1992; 23: 220-228
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO. et al. Blunt versus bladed trocars in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Surg Endosc 2013; 27: 2312-2320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Horstmann M, Horton K, Kurz M. et al. Prospective comparison between the AirSealTm System valve-less trocar and a standard VersaportPlus V2 Tm trocar in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2013; 27: 579-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Gözen AS, Teber D, Rassweiler J. Principles and initial experience of a new device for dissection and hemostasis. Minimally Invasive Therapy 2007; 16: 58-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Fagotti A, Vizzielli G, Fanfani F. et al. Randomized study comparing use of Thunderbeat vs standard electrosurgery during laparosopcic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for gynecologic cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21: 447-453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Rassweiler JJ, Klein J, Tschada A. et al. Laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy using an ergonomic chair: demonstration of technique and matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 2017; 19: 349-357
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Frede T, Stock C, Renner C. et al. Geometry of laparoscopic suturing and knotting technique. J. Endourol 1999; 13: 191-198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hart S. The benefits of automated suturing devices in gynecologic endoscopic surgeries: the Endo Stitch and SILS Stitch. Surg Technol Int 2012; 22: 159-164
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Zondervan PJ, Gozen AS, Opondo D. et al. Partial nephrectomy: Is there an advantage of self-retaining suture in the perioperative period? A matched case-control comparison. World J Urol 2012; 30: 659-664
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Gözen AS, Tokas T, Akin Y. et al. Impact of barbed suture in controlling the dorsal vein complex during laparosopic radical prostatectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2014; 27: 1-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Roth B, Birkhäuser FD, Thalmann GN. et al. Novel prototype sewing device, EndoSew®, for minimally invasive surgery: an extracorporeal construction pilot study in 10 patients. BJU Int 2012; 112: 959-964
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Frede T, Hammady A, Klein J. et al. The Radius Surgical System – a new device for complex minimally invasive procedures in urology?. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 1015-1022
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Wagner AA, Varkarakis M, Link RE. et al. Comparison of surgical performance during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy of two robotic camera holders; EndoAssist and AESOP: A pilot study. Urology 2006; 68: 70-74
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Gözen AS, Tokas T, Tschada A. et al. Comparison of operating positions and ETHOS surgical platform for laparoscopic pelvic surgery simulation. J Endourol 2015; 29: 95-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Rassweiler J, Klein J, Goezen AS. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic non-dismembered pyeloplasty for uretero-pelvic obstruction due to crossing vessels: A matched-paired analysis and review of the literature. Asian J Urol 2018; 5: 172-181
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Jaspers JEN, Bentala M, Herder JL. et al. Mechanical manipulator for intuitive control of endoscopic instruments with seven degrees of freedom. Min Invas Ther and Allied Technol 2004; 13: 191-198
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Fanfani F, Restaino S, Rossitto C. et al. Total laparoscopic (S-LPS) versus TELELAP ALF-X robotic-assisted hysterectomy: a case control study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016; 23: 933-938
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Kim DD, Park DW, Rha KH. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with the REVO I-robot platform in porcine models. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 541-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hagn U, Konietschke R, Tobergte A. et al. DLR Miro Surge: a versatile system for research in endoscopic telesurgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2010; 5: 183-189
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Buffi NM, Lughezzani G, Fossati N. et al. Robot-assisted, single-site, dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction with the new da Vinci platform: a stage 2a study. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 151-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Kaouk JH, Haber GP, Autorino R. et al. A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery: First clinical investigation. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 1033-1043
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Desai MM, Grover R, Aron M. et al. Robotic flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi: initial clinical experience. J Urol 2011; 186: 563-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 https://www.geekfence.com/2018/03/24/monarch-is-a-new-platform-from-surgical-robot-pioneer-frederic-moll/ website visited August 30, 2018
    PubMed
  • 54 Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M. et al. WATER: A double blind, randomized controlled trial of Aquablation vs transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2018; 199: 1252-1261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Imkamp F, Herrmann TR, Tolkach Y. et al. Acceptance, prevalence and indications for robot-assisted laparoscopy – results of a survey among urologists in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Urol Int 2015; 95: 336-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Breda A, Territo A, Gausa L. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: The European experience. Eur Urol 2018; 73: 273-281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Porpiglia F, Autorino R, Rassweiler J. et al. Contemporary urologic mini-laparoscopy: Indications, techniques and surgical outcomes in a multi-institutional European cohort. J Endourol 2014; 28: 951-957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Valerio M, Ahmed HU, Emberton M. et al. The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 732-751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar