Robotic-assisted skull base surgery: Preclinical study

Ray Gervacio F. Blanco, Derek O Boahene

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective and Study Design: To assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted skull base surgery, a preclincal cadaver study was conducted. Materials and Methods: The feasibility study was subdivided into three phases: Phase 1 (surgical corridor) entailed a review of the surgical access, Phase 2 (instrument configuration) entailed arrangements of the robotic instrument (da Vinci® Surgical System; Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) in relation to the surgical corridor and applied to a skull model, and Phase 3 was robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection. Results: Regarding the surgical corridor, the infratemporal area was accessed through a maxillary window, whereas the anterior skull base region was accessed through a combined single maxillary window and nasal corridor. Regarding instrument configuration, the camera was positioned above the two instrument arms, with both instrument arms angled at 30 to the camera axis with a flexed distal tip for the infratemporal skull base. For the anterior skull base, one of the robotic arms was inserted through the unilateral maxillary window, whereas the three-dimensional camera and the second arm were inserted through the nasal corridor. Regarding the robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection, we define the robotic set-up time in this study as the time required to move the robot into position, obtain adequate operative exposure, and place the robotic arms prior to the start of robotic dissection. The robotic set-up time for the anterior skull base dissection averaged 95 minutes, and that for pituitary resection was 61 minutes. The robotic set-up time for infratemporal dissection averaged 23 minutes. Operative time was 63.5 minutes. Robotic and endoscopic techniques can be combined during surgery. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted skull base surgery is feasible. The da Vinci instrument needs to be redesigned to be smaller and preferably with distal articulating tips, prior to clinical application of robotics to skull base surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)776-782
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume23
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Skull Base
Robotics
Dissection
Cadaver
Arm
Nose
Feasibility Studies
Operative Time
Skull

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Robotic-assisted skull base surgery : Preclinical study. / Blanco, Ray Gervacio F.; Boahene, Derek O.

In: Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques, Vol. 23, No. 9, 2013, p. 776-782.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b28012c7cc9f47f7bec8ceed44d424e3,
title = "Robotic-assisted skull base surgery: Preclinical study",
abstract = "Objective and Study Design: To assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted skull base surgery, a preclincal cadaver study was conducted. Materials and Methods: The feasibility study was subdivided into three phases: Phase 1 (surgical corridor) entailed a review of the surgical access, Phase 2 (instrument configuration) entailed arrangements of the robotic instrument (da Vinci{\circledR} Surgical System; Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) in relation to the surgical corridor and applied to a skull model, and Phase 3 was robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection. Results: Regarding the surgical corridor, the infratemporal area was accessed through a maxillary window, whereas the anterior skull base region was accessed through a combined single maxillary window and nasal corridor. Regarding instrument configuration, the camera was positioned above the two instrument arms, with both instrument arms angled at 30 to the camera axis with a flexed distal tip for the infratemporal skull base. For the anterior skull base, one of the robotic arms was inserted through the unilateral maxillary window, whereas the three-dimensional camera and the second arm were inserted through the nasal corridor. Regarding the robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection, we define the robotic set-up time in this study as the time required to move the robot into position, obtain adequate operative exposure, and place the robotic arms prior to the start of robotic dissection. The robotic set-up time for the anterior skull base dissection averaged 95 minutes, and that for pituitary resection was 61 minutes. The robotic set-up time for infratemporal dissection averaged 23 minutes. Operative time was 63.5 minutes. Robotic and endoscopic techniques can be combined during surgery. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted skull base surgery is feasible. The da Vinci instrument needs to be redesigned to be smaller and preferably with distal articulating tips, prior to clinical application of robotics to skull base surgery.",
author = "Blanco, {Ray Gervacio F.} and Boahene, {Derek O}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1089/lap.2012.0573",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "776--782",
journal = "Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A",
issn = "1092-6429",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic-assisted skull base surgery

T2 - Preclinical study

AU - Blanco, Ray Gervacio F.

AU - Boahene, Derek O

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Objective and Study Design: To assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted skull base surgery, a preclincal cadaver study was conducted. Materials and Methods: The feasibility study was subdivided into three phases: Phase 1 (surgical corridor) entailed a review of the surgical access, Phase 2 (instrument configuration) entailed arrangements of the robotic instrument (da Vinci® Surgical System; Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) in relation to the surgical corridor and applied to a skull model, and Phase 3 was robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection. Results: Regarding the surgical corridor, the infratemporal area was accessed through a maxillary window, whereas the anterior skull base region was accessed through a combined single maxillary window and nasal corridor. Regarding instrument configuration, the camera was positioned above the two instrument arms, with both instrument arms angled at 30 to the camera axis with a flexed distal tip for the infratemporal skull base. For the anterior skull base, one of the robotic arms was inserted through the unilateral maxillary window, whereas the three-dimensional camera and the second arm were inserted through the nasal corridor. Regarding the robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection, we define the robotic set-up time in this study as the time required to move the robot into position, obtain adequate operative exposure, and place the robotic arms prior to the start of robotic dissection. The robotic set-up time for the anterior skull base dissection averaged 95 minutes, and that for pituitary resection was 61 minutes. The robotic set-up time for infratemporal dissection averaged 23 minutes. Operative time was 63.5 minutes. Robotic and endoscopic techniques can be combined during surgery. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted skull base surgery is feasible. The da Vinci instrument needs to be redesigned to be smaller and preferably with distal articulating tips, prior to clinical application of robotics to skull base surgery.

AB - Objective and Study Design: To assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted skull base surgery, a preclincal cadaver study was conducted. Materials and Methods: The feasibility study was subdivided into three phases: Phase 1 (surgical corridor) entailed a review of the surgical access, Phase 2 (instrument configuration) entailed arrangements of the robotic instrument (da Vinci® Surgical System; Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) in relation to the surgical corridor and applied to a skull model, and Phase 3 was robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection. Results: Regarding the surgical corridor, the infratemporal area was accessed through a maxillary window, whereas the anterior skull base region was accessed through a combined single maxillary window and nasal corridor. Regarding instrument configuration, the camera was positioned above the two instrument arms, with both instrument arms angled at 30 to the camera axis with a flexed distal tip for the infratemporal skull base. For the anterior skull base, one of the robotic arms was inserted through the unilateral maxillary window, whereas the three-dimensional camera and the second arm were inserted through the nasal corridor. Regarding the robotic-assisted skull base cadaver dissection, we define the robotic set-up time in this study as the time required to move the robot into position, obtain adequate operative exposure, and place the robotic arms prior to the start of robotic dissection. The robotic set-up time for the anterior skull base dissection averaged 95 minutes, and that for pituitary resection was 61 minutes. The robotic set-up time for infratemporal dissection averaged 23 minutes. Operative time was 63.5 minutes. Robotic and endoscopic techniques can be combined during surgery. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted skull base surgery is feasible. The da Vinci instrument needs to be redesigned to be smaller and preferably with distal articulating tips, prior to clinical application of robotics to skull base surgery.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883695285&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883695285&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lap.2012.0573

DO - 10.1089/lap.2012.0573

M3 - Article

C2 - 24001158

AN - SCOPUS:84883695285

VL - 23

SP - 776

EP - 782

JO - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

JF - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

SN - 1092-6429

IS - 9

ER -