Robotic surgery

Valve Replacement Forums

Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

hensylee

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2001
Messages
11,656
Location
snowy - Sharpsburg, Ga USA
Information on robotic surgery:

Robotic Heart Surgery - a status report
by DrRich

In the June, 2001 issue of the Annals of Surgery, encouraging results have been reported from the first pilot study in the United States aimed at evaluating robotically-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery. One year after having the robotic bypass performed, all 19 patients included in the study remained free of complications and of angina.

What is robotic heart surgery?

Robotically-assisted heart surgery is the latest advance in trying to move open heart surgical procedures to the category of minimally invasive surgery - that is, to minimize the extent and the trauma of cardiac surgery as much as possible.

Most minimally invasive surgery is performed by passing an endoscope (a small tube containing an advanced optical system) through a tiny incision. Surgical instruments are then passed either through the endoscope tube itself, or through an additional tiny incision. While visualizing the surgical area through the endoscope, the surgeon manipulates the surgical instruments to complete the operation.

Such endoscopic surgery works well for several types of operations (such as gallbladder removal and knee repairs,) where the part of the body to be operated upon is motionless, and the surgical maneuvers that need to be performed are relatively simple. But moving the surgical instruments manually during endoscopic surgery can be difficult - the length of the instruments is far longer than normal, and the "feel" of these long instruments is non-intuitive to the surgeon. Long instruments also exaggerate normal hand tremors. Thus, endoscopic surgery has achieved only limited success in more complicated operations such as heart surgery, where the heart is beating and the necessary surgical maneuvers tend to be complex.

Robotically-assisted endoscopic heart surgery is aimed at making endoscopic heart operations feasible. With this technology, the surgeon manipulates the surgical instruments with the help of a computer. An endoscope is passed through a tiny incision in the chest wall, and two surgical instruments are passed through additional tiny incisions. The surgeon views the image provided by the endoscope on a computer screen. Instead of manipulating the surgical instruments directly, the surgeon manipulates them via a computer console - similar to manipulating a gamepad to play Ninetendo. The computer interprets the surgeon's hand movements and causes the surgical instruments to respond accordingly. This system addresses the major disadvantages to moving the long surgical instruments manually - computer control of the surgical instruments essentially eliminates the tremor effect, and also the non-intuitive feel of maneuvering such instruments.

While it takes special training to become adept at using robotically-assisted instruments, most surgeons who have had such training report that they feel quite comfortable maneuvering surgical instruments via a console instead of directly.

How is robotic heart surgery being used?

Much of the early work with robotically-assisted heart surgery has been with bypass surgery. So far, this technique has been limited to single bypass grafts in the left anterior descending coronary artery (the LAD). The LAD is located on the front of the heart, and therefore is relatively accessible. It is predicted that with advances in technology, multiple grafts with robotic assistance will be possible, at virtually any location on the heart.

Early efforts have been made at extending robotically assisted surgery to other kinds of heart surgery. Robotic procedures have been successfully performed, for instance, in mitral valve repair, in repairing atrial septal defects (ASD,) and in repairing patent ductus arteriosus (PDA.) It is expected that as experience and technology advance, robotic procedures will be applied to most other forms of heart surgery.

Two robotic surgical systems are currently available, both developed and manufactured in the U.S. However, while both robotic systems have been approved for use in Europe, both remain experimental in the United States. It is not likely they will be approved in the U.S. until randomized clinical trials are completed that convincingly demonstrate their safety and efficacy.

What are the advantages of robotic heart surgery?

The chief advantage of such surgery is that the incisions that are made are tiny, and therefore recovery from surgery is extremely quick. Rapid recovery from cardiac surgery is not only better for the patient, but it is less expensive for society.

What are the disadvantages of robotic heart surgery?

The chief disadvantage at this point is that the technology is new, and (despite early encouraging reports) is still evolving. Its efficacy and safety have not yet been proven sufficiently to allow the FDA to approve it for widespread use.

Another disadvantage is the expense of the robotic systems. They cost between $750,000 and $1,000,000, and it is unlikely that most hospitals will be able to afford purchasing the robotic systems for operations they are performing "just fine" today without the robotic equipment.

The bottom line: it is likely to be several years before robotic heart surgery is widely available.

What controversies surround robotic heart surgery?

There are at least two that come to mind.

1) Not all surgeons think robotic surgery is a great idea. While most agree that robotic surgery is feasible, many question whether it should be pursued at all. They cite the expense of the equipment, and the success they are currently having with today's methods of doing surgery. Such arguments against new technology date back at least to Gutenberg, of course, and are easy to counter. One suspects that those surgeons betraying a Luddite opinion might have other fears in mind - such as a complete disruption of the practice of surgery. It is easy to ask why, for instance, if a surgeon can perform a heart operation while sitting at a console 15 feet away from the patient, then why couldn't that surgeon perform the same operation while sitting 1500 miles away from the patient? In other words, competition for patients would occur on a global scale instead of a local scale. (And everyone could be operated upon by only the very best surgeons.) If such a notion does not disrupt the practice of surgery, DrRich doesn't know what does.

2) Insurers and the government (the two entities that pay for most of health care) understand something that most of the public does not, to wit: the introduction of any successful minimally invasive procedure - while it may reduce the expense of caring for an individual - always increases the total expenditures within the health care system. This is because when a minimally invasive procedure is available, suddenly the number of patients who "need" to have that procedure expands exponentially.

A good example is endoscopic gallbladder surgery. In the past, it was extremely difficult to recover from gallbladder surgery. Such surgery required extensive hospital stays, and resulted in significant and protracted misery on the part of the patient. But with minimally invasive gallbladder surgery recovery is rapid and suffering is minimized. Most people go home the same day or the next day (and as a result the expense of the procedure for each individual is far less than it used to be.) But precisely because the surgery is now so benign, far more people (people who, in the old days, would reasonably conclude that suffering in relative silence was the wisest course of action) are choosing surgery. The total cost to the health care system has exploded. The same, of course, can be predicted to happen when robotic heart surgery becomes widely available.

As a result, there will be a tension between innovative companies and surgeons on one hand, and insurers, regulators, and Luddite surgeons on the other. Robotic heart surgery will not be accepted with open arms by everybody, even if its efficacy and safety are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
 
I had robotic surgery in April 2001 by the Davinci robot at Pitt County Memorial Hospital by one of its founders Dr Walter Chitwood. I was in trila phase #2 as the first patient. My recovery time was quicker but I did develop problems with the incision site in the right groin area.

He put rings on my mitral valve to repair the leakage which was excessive. 6 months later the valve was leaking again very excessively and my heart was greatly compromised and I ended up with cardiomyopathy and congestive heart failure. I had to wait over a year and get my heart back up to par before any other surgery could be done. My cardiologist sent me to Duke and they determined I did indeed need replacement asap and Dr Donald Glower performed the replacement on Jan 6, 2003.

About 3 months ago Dr Chitwood was on our local news reporting ALL cases usuing the Davinci robot had been a success! He knew my valve was again leaking and reported this anyway to my astonishment.

Upon Dr Glower doing my surgery, he reported to me that the valve was covered in scar tissue and couldnt be repaired so he had to replace it. He said my heart was also surronded with much scar tissue. The surgery was long and difficult.

Are these robots worth it? I would NEVER advise anyne to use it again without more research being done first. I think I made a big mistake in letting him do this surgery on me when it was so new and had only been used a dozen times.

Think carefuly before you agree to use this surgery. I believe in the minimally invasive surgery, but not the robot. This is my opinion.
 
Very interesting and informative, Alicia - this is what we need to hear in VR so we can make good decisions about our own situations. The more information and education we have the better off we are. Thanks for your response to this important subject. God bless
 
Alicia

Alicia

I agree with hensylee. We should know the successes and failures of these kinds of procedures. When we asked my surgeons about the minimally invasive surgery he told us there was too much scar tissue to even try. I do hope they can perfect this procedure for those in the future. Just imagine, getting open heart surgery without the sternectomy.
 
Just a small comment, but something that worries me about robotic surgery.

As mentioned it is done via computer info.....Now while we know hospitals have generator backup...we also know there is a minute pause if electric fails and generator must 'kick in'...Scary for me to think at what moment this might occur during any procedure with robots.

I very much trust a skilled surgeon to pause for a moment...not sure about a robot...or the 'technological return'...hmmmm...worth some thought, in my mind.

Zipper/Joan
 
oh joan!
what a scary thought!!! it never crossed my mind!
amazing, the new things i learn here every day!

alicia,
thanks for that info. i truly think we all need to know these realities. i'm sorry you had to go through it, but am so glad that you are doing better now.
be well all,
-sylvia
 
Joan,

The computers used for medical procedures are powered by uninterrupted power supply, simply put, the computers are running continuously on battery power with the hospital main power supply used only to keep the batteries charged.

Jack.
 
Jack,

Thanks for that info..very reassuring. My little hospital doesn't have all the computer generated equipment that the larger hospital has so patients would not be in that situation. Whew...makes perfect sense..the battery thing!

Joan
 
Excessive Scar Tissue

Excessive Scar Tissue

Pegne,
Is there excessive scar tissue with minimally invasive scar tissue??? I never heard that one before. I had minimally invasive aortic valve replacement surgery and think that it is great. Only a 3 inch scar on the outside. Maybe I am in for an unpleasant surprize when my current tissue valve wears out and I need to have it replaced.
Best wishes,
Don
AVR; MI; CCF; 4/02; Cosgrove; Bovine Tissue
 
Donna

Donna

I guess I should have explained that I have had 3 other open heart surgeries when we asked my doctor about the minimally invasive surgery for the 4th he said it was not an option for me. It's the scar tissue from the previous 3 heart surgeries I had. It's manuvering that thing through so much scar tissue. Every time you have surgery you get scar tissue in and out of your body. It's hard to get through the scar tissue. My 3rd heart surgery lasted 13 hours because of scar tissue. My 4th about 11 hours. It takes longer to get inside. The surgeries were rather complicated but most of the time was taken just doing the sterectomy and getting to the heart. Sorry I didn't explain myself. Peggy
 
Correction -and- Appreciation

Correction -and- Appreciation

Hi Pegne,
Correction: On the first line of my post I of course meant mimimally invasive surgery and not mimially invasive scar tissue -- although that might be a good thing too.
Appreciation: Thanks for clearing the scar tissue thing up for me. You had me worried.
Four open heart surgeries!!! You've been through a lot -- and you appear to be doing well. Good for you. I hope my 2'nd isn't until about 2015.
Best wishes,
Don
AVR; MI; CCF; 4/04; Cosgrove; Bovine Tissue
 
Don

Don

I think you had it right the first time unlike me who called you Donna. I guess I'm so used to e-mailing my friend in Dallas that when I put Don in there my subconsience was thinking Donna. Sorry Peggy
 

Latest posts

Back
Top