scholarly journals Medical Malpractice and Transoral Robotic Surgery: Evaluation and Some Preemptive Thoughts

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (12) ◽  
pp. 477-480
Author(s):  
Daniel D. Lydiatt ◽  
Ryan Sewell
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Robotic Approach ◽  
Manufacturing Problems ◽  
Safety Guidelines ◽  
Undesirable Outcome

Medical malpractice is costly and disruptive, and it is important to prevent. We conducted a study with the objective to look at medical malpractice in robotic surgery overall, to evaluate reasons for litigation, and to comment on possible strategies to avoid litigation with transoral robotic surgery. We used the Westlaw computerized database to identify all state and federal verdict summaries in medical malpractice cases. We found 17 cases alleging malpractice that involved the use of robotic surgery. In all, the plaintiffs in 6 cases (35%) contended that an open rather than a robotic approach should have been used, 5 (29%) alleged negligent credentialing, 4 (24%) alleged training deficiencies, 2 (12%) alleged manufacturing problems, and 1 (6%) charged that robotic surgery should have been performed instead of open surgery (1 case involved two of these allegations). In 11 cases (65%), plaintiffs charged that robotic surgery contributed to an undesirable outcome, and in 6 cases (35%) they raised concerns about informed consent. In all, only 5 of the 17 lawsuits (29%) resulted in plaintiff verdicts or settlements; damages ranged from $95,000 to $7.5 million. We believe the courts should not play a major role in establishing safety guidelines for the introduction of new technology such as robotic surgery. Instead, training and credentialing guidelines should be established by appropriate national associations and societies to assist hospitals in doing so.

scholarly journals Supraglottiskarzinom: Erfahrungen mit der transoralen Roboter-Chirurgie

2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (03) ◽  
pp. 143-144
Author(s):  
Markus Kapsreiter
Keyword(s):  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Laryngeal Cancer ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Oncological Treatment ◽  
Transorale Roboterchirurgie

Karabulut B et al. Comparison of functional and oncological treatment outcomes after transoral robotic surgery and open surgery for supraglottic laryngeal cancer. J Laryngol Otol 2018; 132: 832–836 Die Behandlungsmöglichkeiten eines Supraglottiskarzinoms umfassen offene Supraglottis-Laryngektomie, transorale Lasertherapie, transorale Roboterchirurgie und Chemotherapie. Ärzte der HNO-Klinik des Ümraniye-Krankenhauses in Istanbul verglichen die Behandlungsergebnisse bei Patienten mit supraglottischen Tumoren des Larynxkarzinoms, die mittels einer transoralen robotischen Laryngektomie und einer offenen Laryngektomie behandelt wurden.

Comparison of functional and oncological treatment outcomes after transoral robotic surgery and open surgery for supraglottic laryngeal cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (9) ◽  
pp. 832-836 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Karabulut ◽  
İ Deveci ◽  
M Sürmeli ◽  
A Şahin-Yilmaz ◽  
Ç Oysu
Keyword(s):  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Laryngeal Cancer ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Oral Feeding ◽  
Feeding Time ◽  
Oncological Treatment ◽  
Supraglottic Laryngectomy

AbstractObjectiveTo compare functional and oncological treatment outcomes among patients with supraglottic laryngeal cancers who underwent transoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy and open supraglottic laryngectomy.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted of 17 patients treated by transoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy and 20 patients treated by open supraglottic laryngectomy.ResultsNo tracheostomy or prolonged intubation was needed in the transoral robotic surgery group. Furthermore, that group had a shorter oral feeding time, hospitalisation and recovery period. There was no difference between groups in terms of complications. There were no differences in overall survival time and disease-specific survival time between groups.ConclusionTransoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy for supraglottic laryngeal cancer is an oncologically safe and functional procedure with better results when compared to conventional open surgery.

scholarly journals Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature

2020 ◽  
pp. e599-e607
Author(s):  
À. Roselló ◽  
R. Albuquerque ◽  
X. Roselló-Llabrés ◽  
A. Marí-Roig ◽  
A. Estrugo-Devesa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Review Of The Literature

scholarly journals Robotic Esophagectomy. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 640
Author(s):  
Michele Manigrasso ◽  
Sara Vertaldi ◽  
Alessandra Marello ◽  
Stavros Athanasios Antoniou ◽  
Nader Kamal Francis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Wound Infection ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Conventional Laparoscopy ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Robotic Approach ◽  
Robotic Esophagectomy

Background: Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy is demonstrated to be related with a facilitation in thoracoscopic procedure. To give an update on the state of art of robotic esophagectomy for cancr a systematic review with meta-analysis has been performed. Methods: a search of the studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic or open esophagectomy was performed trough the medical libraries, with the search string “robotic and (oesophagus OR esophagus OR esophagectomy OR oesophagectomy)”. Outcomes were: postoperative complications rate (anastomotic leakage, bleeding, wound infection, pneumonia, recurrent laryngeal nerves paralysis, chylotorax, mortality), intraoperative outcomes (mean blood loss, operative time and conversion), oncologic outcomes (harvested nodes, R0 resection, recurrence) and recovery outcomes (length of hospital stay). Results: Robotic approach is superior to open surgery in terms of blood loss p = 0.001, wound infection rate, p = 0.002, pneumonia rate, p = 0.030 and mean number of harvested nodes, p < 0.0001 and R0 resection rate, p = 0.043. Similarly, robotic approach is superior to conventional laparoscopy in terms of mean number of harvested nodes, p = 0.001 pneumonia rate, p = 0.003. Conclusions: robotic surgery could be considered superior to both open surgery and conventional laparoscopy. These encouraging results should promote the diffusion of the robotic surgery, with the creation of randomized trials to overcome selection bias.

Transoral Robotic Surgery in Oropharyngeal Carcinoma

2015 ◽  
Vol 139 (11) ◽  
pp. 1389-1397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel N. Helman ◽  
Thomas Schwedhelm ◽  
Sameep Kadakia ◽  
Yanhua Wang ◽  
Bradley A. Schiff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Human Papillomavirus ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Transoral Surgery

Context The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma has increased during the past decade and is related primarily to the human papillomavirus. This change in etiology, from tobacco and alcohol to human papillomavirus, has resulted in improved survival for the disease. In the United States, open resection had largely been replaced by concurrent chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy by the early 2000s. The advent of transoral surgery has led to an increase in surgery as the primary treatment for both early- and advanced-stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma because it has potential advantages over open surgery and nonsurgical modalities. Objective To provide an overview of transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma and contrast it with other surgical and nonsurgical modalities. Data Sources Articles from 2000 to 2014 were accessioned on PubMed and reviewed for utility by the primary authors. Conclusions Transoral surgery has become more commonly used as a minimally invasive approach to treat oropharyngeal tumors. Other strategies, including radiation, chemotherapy with radiation, and open surgery, are still important treatment approaches. The treatment options for an individual patient rely on multiple factors, including the tumor location and size, features of the tumor, and patient comorbidities. The continued study of these techniques is important to match the patient with the most appropriate treatment.

scholarly journals Robotic Surgery Advantages and Challenges

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alireza Mirbagheri ◽  
Mehrnaz Aghanouri
Keyword(s):  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
New Technology ◽  
First Line ◽  
Near Future

The interest in using robotic surgery especially for gynecology, gastroenterology, and urology is increasing every day as this technology is expected to be the first line of surgery in many medical fields in the near future. This attentiveness is due to the unique features of this method and its advantages over open surgery and laparoscopy technique. Knowing curiously about robotic surgery, its components, characteristics, advantages, and challenges is crucial to be prepared for such huge evolution and to be engaged in the advancement of this new technology.

Comparison study of transoral robotic surgery and radical open surgery for hypopharyngeal cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 133 (6) ◽  
pp. 641-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Min Park ◽  
Hyung Kwon Byeon ◽  
Hyun Pil Chung ◽  
Eun Chang Choi ◽  
Se-Heon Kim
Keyword(s):  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Hypopharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery ◽  
Comparison Study
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document