Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

JİNEKOLOJİDE ROBOTİK CERRAHİ

ROBOTIC GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2009

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
During last decade, the existence of laparoscopic surgery led to enormous advances in the field of gynecological procedures. However, the new laparoscopic procedures also had its disadvantages, including an unstable camera platform, the limited mobility of straight laparoscopic instruments, two-dimensional imaging, and a poor ergonomic position for the surgeon. For this reason, much attention is now being paid to the promise of robotic surgery. Recently, robotics has been applied in clinical practice for a variety of laparoscopic procedures. This article evaluates the advantages and limitations of robot assisted laparoscopy in gynecology and describes the da Vinci® robotic system.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Son dekadda laparoskopideki geliĢmeler jinekolojik prosedürlerde inanılmaz ilerlemelere neden olmuĢtur. Ancak bu sistem, stabil olmayan kamera platformu, laparoskopik aletlerin düzlemdeki sınırlı hareketleri, iki boyutlu görüntü, cerrah için kötü ergonomik pozisyon gibi birçok dezavantajı da birlikte getirmiĢtir. Bu nedenle artık ilgi robotik cerrahinin sundukları nedeniyle ona yönelmiĢtir. Son zamanlarda robotik sistemler birçok jinekolojik cerrahi prosedüründe uygulanmaya baĢlanmıĢtır. Bu derleme, da Vinci® robotik sistemi tanıtarak robotların jinekolojik cerrahide kullanımlarını, avantaj ve dezavantajlarını değerlendirecektir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-jinekolojide-robotik-cerrahi.pdf
  • 4
143-149
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Nezhat CR, Burrell MO, Nezhat FR, Benigno BB, Welander CE. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with paraaortic and pelvic node dissection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 166:864-865.
2. Nezhat C, Hood J, Winer W, Nexhat F, Crowgey SR, Garrison CP. Videolaseroscopy and laser laparoscopy
in gynaecology.Br J Hosp Med. 1987; 38:219-24.
3. Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Nezhat C. Operative laparoscopy. Videolaparoscopy and videolaseroscopy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1994; 734:433-444.
4. Satava RM. Virtual reality, telesurgery, and the new world order of medicine. J Image Guid Surg. 1995; 1:12-6.
5. Schlag PM, Moesta KT, Rakovsky S, Graschew G. Telemedicine: the new must for surgery.Arch Surg. 1999; 134:1216-21.
6. Ballantyne GH. Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring: review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 2002; 10: 1389–1402.
7. Kavoussi LR, Moore RG, Adams JB, Partin AW. Comparison of Robotic Versus Human Laparoscopic Camera Control. J. Urol 1995; 154:2134-2136.
8. Stylopoulos N, Rattner D. Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 6:1321-1337.
9. Nezhat C, Saberi NS, Shahmohamady B, Nezhat F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in gynecological surgery. JSLS. 2006;10:317-20.
10. Farr Nezhat, Gazi Yıldırım. Jinekolojide Yeni Bir Çağın BaĢlangıcı: Robotik Cerrahi. 6. Ulusal Jinekoloji ve Obstetrik Kongresi. 14-19 Mayıs 2008-Belek, Antalya.
11. Datta MS, Yildirim G, Rahaman J, Hagopian G, Chuang L, Nezhat FR. Robotic Gynecologic Surgery in a Fellowship Training Program: An Initial Experience. The 36th Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. November 13-17, 2007. Marriot Wardman Park, Washington DC, USA.
12. Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, Settembre A, Miranda M, Amato F, Pirozzi F, Caiazzo P. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Preliminary experience Surg Endosc 2005; 19: 117-119.
13. Ferguson JL, Beste TM, Nelson KH, Daucher JA. Making the Transition From Standard Gynecologic Laparoscopy to Robotic Laparoscopy. JSLS 2004; 8:326-328.
14. Hubens G, Coveliers H, Balliu L, Ruppert M, Vaneerdeweg W. A performance study comparing manual and robotically assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci system. Surg Endosc 2003; 17:1595-9
15. Sarle R, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Peabody J, Menon M. Surgical robotics and laparoscopic training drills. J Endourol 2004;18:63-7.
16. Hanly EJ, Marohn MR, Bachman SL, Talamini MA, Hacker SO, Howard RS, et al. Multiservice laparoscopic surgical training using the da Vinci surgical system. Am J Surg 2004; 187:309 -15.
17. Guru KA, Kuvshinoff BW, Pavlov-Shapiro S, Bienko MB, Aftab MN, Brady WE,Mohler JL. Impact of robotics and laparoscopy on surgical skills: A comparative study. J Am Coll Surg. 2007; 204:96-101.
18. Margossian H, Garcia-Ruiz A, Falcone T, Goldberg JM, Attaran M, Miller JH, Gagner M. Robotically assisted laparoscopic tubal anastomosis in a porcine model: a pilot study. Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A.
149
Robotic Surgery
Ġstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi Cilt / Volume: 72 • Sayı / Number: 4 • Yıl/Year: 2009
1998; 8:69-73.
19. Mettler L, Ibrahim M, Jonat W. One year of experience working with the aid of a robotic assistant (the voice-controlled optic holder AESOP) in gynaecological endoscopic surgery. Hum Reprod. 1998, 13:2748-50.
20. Falcone T, Goldberg J, Garcia-Ruiz A, Margossian H, Stevens L. Full robotic assistance for laparoscopic tubal anastomosis: a case report. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1999; 9:107-13.
21. Falcone T, Goldberg JM, Margossian H, Stevens L. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal anastomosis: a human pilot study. Fertil Steril 2000; 73:1040-2.
22. Margossian H, Falcone T.Robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and adnexal surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2001; 11:161-5.
23. Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend C Jr. Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc. 2002; 16:1271-3.
24. Degueldre M, Vandromme J, Huong PT, Cadiere GB. Robotically assisted laparoscopic microsurgical tubal reanastomosis: a feasibility study. Fertil Steril 2000; 74:1020 -3.
25. DiMarco DS, Chow GK, Gettman MT, Elliott DS. Robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Urology 2004; 63:373-6.
26. Advincula AP, Song A, Burke W, Reynolds RK. Preliminary experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004; 11:511- 8.
27. Dharia SP, Falcone T. Robotics in reproductive medicine. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1-11.
28. Nezhat C, Lavie O, Lemyre M, Unal E, Nezhat CH, Nezhat F. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: scientific dream or reality? Fertil Steril. 2008; 23. [Epub ahead of print].
29. Field JB, Benoit MF, Dinh TA, Diaz-Arrastia C.
Computer-enhanced robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology. Surg Endosc 2007;21: 244–246.
30. Magrina JF. Robotic surgery in gynecology. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2007;28:77–82.
31. Yildirim G, Datta MS, , Steiner N, Nezhat FR. Robotic Technique for Radical Hysterectomy and Bilateral Pelvic Lymphadenectomy: A Case Presentation. AAGL. The 36th Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. November 13-17, 2007. Marriot Wardman Park, Washington DC, USA.
32. Datta MS, Yildirim G, Zakhazansky K, Nagaresheth N, Chuang L, Nezhat FR. Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Radical Hysterectomy and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy: A Visual Comparison. AAGL. The 36th Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. November 13-17, 2007. Marriot Wardman Park, Washington DC, USA.
33. Datta MS, Chuang L, Yildirim G, Zakhazansky K, Nezhat FR, Steiner N, Gretz H, Nagaresheth N, Rahaman J. A comparison of Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Gynecologic Malignancy Treatment in a Fellowship Training Program. AAGL. The 36th Global Congress of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. November 13-17, 2007. Marriot Wardman Park, Washington DC, USA.
34. Boggess J. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: evolution of a new surgical paradigm. J Robotic Surg 2007; 1:31–37.
35. Magrina JF, Kho RM, Weaver AL, Montero RP, Magtibay PM. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy.Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 109:86-91.
36. Sereno S, Mutter D, Dallemagne B, Smith CD, Marescaux J. Telementoring for minimally invasive surgical training by wireless robot. Surg Innov. 2007; 14:184-91.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com