Download PDF
Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2021; 34(05): 345-352
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1726353
Review Article

Augmented Reality: Moving Robotics Forward

Nadine Hachach-Haram
1   Department of Surgery and Clinical Innovation, Guy's and St. Thomas' National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
,
Danilo Miskovic
1   Department of Surgery and Clinical Innovation, Guy's and St. Thomas' National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Compared with other fields, adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery remains relatively slow. One of the reasons for this is that the expected benefits of robotics, such as greater accuracy, speed, and better patient outcomes, are not born out in evidence comparing use of robotics for colorectal procedures to conventional laparoscopy. But evidence also suggests that outcomes with colorectal robotic procedures depend on the experience of the surgeon, suggesting that a steep learning curve is acting as a barrier to the benefits of robotics being realized. In this paper, we analyze exactly why surgeon skill and proficiency is such a critical factor in colorectal surgery, especially around the most complex procedures associated with cancer. Shortening of the learning curve is crucial for both the adoption of the technique and the efficient use of expert trainers. Looking beyond the basics of training and embracing a new generation of digital learning technologies that facilitate peer-to-peer collaboration and development beyond the confines of individual institutions may be an important contributor to achieve these goals in the future.

Keywords

robotic colorectal surgery - robot-assisted colorectal surgery - colorectal robotic - remote learning - digital learning


Publication History

Article published online:
03 September 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Genova P, Pantusso G, Abdalla S. et al. Milestones in robotic colorectal surgery development: an historical overview. Mini-invasive Surg 2020; 4: 2 DOI: 10.20517/2574-1225.2019.30.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wright JP, Albert MR. A current review of robotic colorectal surgery. Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg 2020; 5 DOI: 10.21037/ales.2019.12.01.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Weaver A, Steele S. Robotics in colorectal surgery. 2016 5. F1000
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cheng CL, Rezac C. The role of robotics in colorectal surgery. BMJ 2018; 360: j5304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 AlAsari S, Min BS. Robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review. International Scholarly Research Notices 2012; 2012: 293894 DOI: 10.5402/2012/293894.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shah MF, Nasir II, Parvaiz A. Updates in robotic colorectal surgery. Surg 2020; 38 (01) 38-42
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP. et al. Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22 (02) 546-556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sheetz KH, Claflin J, Dimick JB. Trends in the Adoption of Robotic Surgery for Common Surgical Procedures. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3 (01) e1918911
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bouquet de Joliniere J, Librino A, Dubuisson JB. et al. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Front Surg 2016; 3: 26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Keller DS, Hashemi L, Lu M, Delaney CP. Short-term outcomes for robotic colorectal surgery by provider volume. J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217 (06) 1063-1069
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Keller DS, Senagore AJ, Lawrence JK, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP. Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection. Surg Endosc 2014; 28 (01) 212-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Liao G, Zhao Z, Deng H, Li X. Comparison of pathological outcomes between robotic rectal cancer surgery and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis based on seven randomized controlled trials. Int J Med Robot 2019; 15 (05) e2027
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Larsen SG, Pfeffer F, Kørner H. Norwegian moratorium on transanal total mesorectal excision. Br J Surg 2019; 106 (09) 1120-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kang L, Sylla P, Atallah S, Ito M, Wexner SD, Wang JP. taTME: boom or bust?. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 2020; 8 (01) 1-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Keller DS, Grossman RC, Winter DC. Choosing the new normal for surgical education using alternative platforms. Surgery 2020; 38 (10) 617-622
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Koerner C, Rosen SA. How robotics is changing and will change the field of colorectal surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg 2019; 11 (10) 381-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kop R, Hill A. Connectivism: learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn 2008; 9 (03) DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v9i3.523.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Elbuluk AM, Ast MP, Stimac JD, Banka TR, Abdel MP, Vigdorchik JM. Peer-to-peer collaboration adds value for surgical colleagues. HSS J 2018; 14 (03) 294-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hu YY, Mazer LM, Yule SJ. et al. Complementing operating room teaching with video-based coaching. JAMA Surg 2017; 152 (04) 318-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Greenberg CC, Ghousseini HN, Pavuluri Quamme SR. et al; Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Program. A statewide surgical coaching program provides opportunity for continuous professional development. Ann Surg 2018; 267 (05) 868-873
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar