Clinical References - Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery
The following selected publications support the clinical efficacy of robotic-assisted MIS.
Please note: While Medline provides links to publishers’ sites offering PDFs/full text articles, downloads typically require a fee. You may also contact academic libraries (for example, University of California) for document delivery services.
2008
Payne TN, Dauterive FR.
A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 May-Jun;15(3):286-91. Epub 2008 Mar 6.
In this study looking back on 100 patients treated before and 100 patients treated after the introduction of da Vinci Surgery into their practice, the surgeon authors found it was more likely that hysterectomy patients treated before da Vinci would need a large abdominal incision or would need conversion to open surgery. In other words, before da Vinci, the surgeons more often would have to "open up" patients during a minimally invasive surgery -- for example, when it was discovered that the patient's uterus size or adhesions from prior surgeries made a minimally invasive approach impossible to complete. Also in this study, using da Vinci Surgery also reduced the length of the surgery, reduced blood loss by half and significantly shortened length of stay in the hospital (from 1.6 to 1 day). This study concludes that da Vinci Surgery may help surgeons complete more minimally invasive hysterectomies and may help reduce the frequency of hysterectomy performed using large abdominal incisions. Abstract
2004
Darzi SA, Munz Y. The impact of minimally invasive surgical techniques. Annu Rev Med. 2004;55:223-37. Review. Abstract
Purkayastha S, Athanasiou T, Casula R, Darzi A. Robotic surgery: a review. Hosp Med. 2004 Mar;65(3):153-9. Abstract
Sarle R, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Peabody J, Menon M. Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills. J Endourol. 2004 Feb;18(1):63-6; discussion 66-7. Abstract
Satava RM. Disruptive visions: a robot is not a machine...systems integration for surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2004 Apr;18(4):617-20. Epub 2004 Mar 19. Review. Abstract
2003
Ballantyne GH, Moll F. The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 2003 Dec;83(6):1293-304, vii. Abstract
Bann S, Khan M, Hernandez J, Munz Y, Moorthy K, Datta V, Rockall T, Darzi A. Robotics in surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2003 May;196(5):784-95. Review. No abstract available.
Chang L, Satava RM, Pellegrini CA, Sinanan MN. Robotic surgery: identifying the learning curve through objective measurement of skill. Surg Endosc. 2003 Nov;17(11):1744-8. Epub 2003 Sep 10. Abstract
Langenburg SE, Knight CG, Klein MD. Robotic surgery: an update. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2003;13(5):429-36. Abstract
Patel YR, Donias HW, Boyd DW, Pande RU, Amodeo JL, Karamanoukian RL, D'Ancona G, Karamanoukian HL. Are you ready to become a robo-surgeon? Am Surg. 2003 Jul;69(7):599-603. Abstract
Talamini MA, Chapman S, Horgan S, Melvin WS; The Academic Robotics Group. A prospective analysis of 211 robotic-assisted surgical procedures. Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1521-4. Epub 2003 Aug 15. Abstract
