Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic intracorporal colorectal sutured anastomosis using the Radius Surgical System in a phantom model

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 03 April 2009

Abstract

Background

The Radius Surgical System (RSS) is a manipulator with additional degrees of freedom to enhance the dexterity of laparoscopic suturing. Our aim was to determine the feasibility and potentially added value of laparoscopic intracorporal sutured colorectal anastomosis (RSS) compared with suturing with conventional laparoscopic instruments (CLI).

Methods

A total of 72 colorectal anastomoses and 30 single sutures using RSS and CLI were performed in the study. The experiment was divided as follows: One surgeon performed 40 colorectal anastomoses using RSS to assess the learning curve and the feasibility of the technique; The same surgeon performed 10 additional colorectal anastomoses with CLI which were then compared to the last 10 cases of the 40 anastomoses with RSS; Fifteen single sutures in the horizontal plane with RSS and 15 with CLI between two segments of colon were performed to compare the traction force to disrupt the suture; Twelve anastomoses were performed by the other three participants to evaluate ergonomy.

Results

Three leakages (7.5%) were found in the 40 anastomoses with RSS but none after the eighth case. There was no stenosis. The mean time for the anastomoses once the learning curve was achieved was 32.7 min. After 21 anastomoses with RSS there was no improvement in the operating time. The quality of the suture was superior with RSS, with a larger anastomosis diameter, higher bursting pressure, and fewer suturing failures being found. The RSS suture withstood a higher traction force. The participants showed more discomfort suturing with CLI.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopic colorectal anastomosis using RSS. Anastomosis with RSS was shown to be safer. The three participants evaluating ergonomy reflected less discomfort in hand/wrist using RSS. Others ergonomic problems were comparable to CLI.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ash HE, Joyce TJ, Unsworth A (1996) Biomechanics of the distal upper limb. Curr Orthopaedics 10:25–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Berguer R (1998) Surgical technology and the ergonomics of laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 12:458–462

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Boer KT, Wit LT, Davids PHP, Denkelman J, Gouma DJ (2001) Analysis of the quality and efficiency in learning laparoscopic skills. Surg Endosc 15:497–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dakin GF, Gagner M (2003) Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between standard instruments and two surgical robotic systems. Surg Endosc 17:574–579

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Emam TA, Hanna G, Cushieri A (2002) Ergonomic principles of task alignment, visual display, and direction of execution of laparoscopic bowel suturing. Surg Endosc 16:267–271

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fingerhut A, Hay JM, Elhadad A, Lacaine F, Flamant Y (1995) Supraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis: hand-sewn versus circular staples-a controlled clinical trial. French Associations for Surgical Research. Surgery 118:479–485

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Frede T, Hammady A, Klein J, Teber D et al (2007) The Radius Surgical System—A new device for complex minimally invasive procedures in Urology? Eur Urol 51:1015–1022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Garcia-Ruiz A, Gagner M, Miller JH, Steiner CP, Hahn JF (1998) Manual vs robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of basic manipulation and suturing tasks. Arch Surg 133:957–961

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamad MA, Mentges B, Buess G (2003) Laparoscopic sutured anastomosis of the bowel. Technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc 17:1840–1844

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hansen AJ, Schlinkert RT (2005) Hand movements in laparoscopic suturing. A simple vector analysis. Surg Endosc 19:412–417

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Inaki N, Waseda M, Buess GF (2005) Experimental results and early clinical experience of a manual manipulator: radius surgical system. J Jpn Soc Endosc Surg 10(5):577–581

    Google Scholar 

  12. Joice P, Hanna GB, Shimi S, Cushieri A (1998) Ergonomic evaluation of laparoscopic bowel suturing. Am J Surg 176:373–378. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(98)00202-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. MacRae HM, McLeod RS (1998) Handsewn vs. stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 41(2):180–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Max E, Sweeney WB, Bailey HR, Oommen SC, Butts DR, Smith KW, Zamora LF, Skakun GB (1991) Results of 1000 single-layer continuous polypropylene intestinal anastomoses. Am J Surg 162:461–467

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Moran BJ (1996) Stapling instruments for intestinal anastomosis in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 66:820–823

    Google Scholar 

  16. Msika S, Iannelli A, Marano A, Zeitoun G, Deroide G, Kianmanesh R, Flamant Y, Hay JM (2000) Hand-sewn intra-abdominal anastomosis performed via video laparoscopy during colorectal surgery. Ann Chir 125:439–443

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nio D, Bemelman WA, Boer KT, Dunker MS, Gouma DJ, Van Gulik TM (2002) Efficiency of manual vs robotical (Zeus) assisted laparoscopic surgery in the performance of standardized tasks. Surg Endosc 16:412–415

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ruurda JP, Broeders IAMJ (2003) Robot-assisted laparoscopic intestinal anastomosis. An experimental study in pigs. Surg Endosc 17:236–241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ruurda JP, Broeders IAMJ, Pulles B, Kappelhof FM, Van der Werken C (2004) Manual robot assisted endoscopic suturing. Time-action analysis in an experimental model. Surg Endosc 18:1249–1252

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Schurr MO, Buess GF, Schwarz K (2001) Robotics in endoscopic surgery: can mechanical manipulators provide a more simple solution for the problem of limited degrees of freedom? MITAT 10(6):289–293

    Google Scholar 

  21. Senagore AJ, Duepree HJ, Delaney CP et al (2002) Cost structure of laparoscopic and open sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:485–490

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sielezneff I et al (2001) Short-term functional outcome following elective surgery for complicated sigmoid diverticular disease: sutured or stapled end-to-end anastomosis to the proximal rectum? Colorect Dis 3:23–27

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Szabo Z (1999) Principals of tissue approximation. In: Scott Conner CEH (ed) The SAGES Manual: fundamentals of laparoscopy and GI endoscopy, Springer, New York, pp 68–81

    Google Scholar 

  24. Szabo Z, Hunter J, Berci G, Sackier J, Cushieri A (1994) Analysis of surgical movements during suturing in laparoscopy. Endosc Surg Allied Technol 21:55–61

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tomohisa F et al (2004) Endo-bowel clamp (PL540S) for safe rectal irrigation in laparoscopy-assisted rectal resection. Surg Today 34:882–884

    Google Scholar 

  26. Torres Bermudez JR, Buess G (2006) Evaluation of a new technique for laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticulitis. Tobias-lib. http://w210.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/dbt/volltexte/2006/2312, June 6,2006

  27. Van Veelen MA, Meijer DW, Uijttewaal, Goossens RHM, Snijders CJ, Kasemier G (2003) Improvement of the laparoscopic needle holder based on new ergonomic guidelines. Surg Endosc 17:699–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Waseda M, Inaki N, Mailaender L, Buess GF (2005) An innovative trainer for surgical procedures using animal organs. Min Invasive Ther 14.4–5:262–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Waxman BP (1983) Large bowel anastomosis: the circular staplers. BJS 70:64–67

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author thanks all members of the Section for Minimally Invasive Surgery of the University Clinic of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Tuebingen University, Germany for their support and the “Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst” (DAAD) for a research scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section for Minimaly Invasive Surgery, Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Tuebingen University, Tuebingen, Germany

    J. R. Torres Bermudez, G. Buess, M. Waseda, I. Gacek & N. Inaky

  2. Servicio de Cirugía General y Endoscópica, Hospital “Dr. Manuel Gea Gonzalez”, Mexico, DF, Mexico

    F. Becerra Garcia

  3. Department of Endoscopic Surgery, National Institute of Health, Yerevan, Armenia

    G. A. Manukyan

Authors
  1. J. R. Torres Bermudez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Buess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Waseda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. Gacek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. Becerra Garcia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. G. A. Manukyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. N. Inaky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. R. Torres Bermudez.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0443-1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Torres Bermudez, J.R., Buess, G., Waseda, M. et al. Laparoscopic intracorporal colorectal sutured anastomosis using the Radius Surgical System in a phantom model. Surg Endosc 23, 1624–1632 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9992-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9992-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation