Robots and Excision (L.A.P.E.X.) of Endometriosis
When? Why Not Now?
By Robert B. Albee,
Jr., MD, FACOG, ACGE
Medical Director, Center for Endometriosis Care
The currently available robot, referred to
as the ‘da Vinci®’, is a wonderful surgical tool that adds an increased
degree of instrument control remotely. It has usefulness in many
surgical subspecialties, where it adds a degree of exactness to
virtually every instrument motion. This has been well demonstrated in
the field of urology, where at the time of robotically-assisted radical
prostatectomy, nerve sparing is significantly improved.
Although Dr. Sinervo and I have had the
basic training in use of the robot, we are not using it at present for
compelling reasons. I do, however, expect the majority of the obstacles
to be removed over time. Here are some current reasons:
-
LASER ADAPTATION: At present, there is
not a carbon dioxide laser adaptation to the robot. Excision of
Endometriosis can certainly be accomplished with many different
sources of energy; however, in my opinion, there is nothing as
versatile as the CO2 laser.
-
CUMBERSOME MOVEMENT OF THE MAIN
SUPPORTING EQUIPMENT: Widespread Endometriosis from pelvic sidewall
to sidewall and bladder to bowel requires easy movement from one
area to the other. The da Vinci® is a large piece of equipment, and
often, the entire machine must be moved when a different area is
going to be worked on.
-
INCREASED TIME: The set-up time for the
robot takes longer, even after support staff training is complete.
Currently, it is not a quick ‘on and off’ system. This means longer
anesthetic and associated risks.
-
EXPENSE: The robot is an expensive
instrument that adds considerably to the cost of surgery. Since the
end result of excision with the robot is not different or better
than our laser excision (L.A.P.E.X.), there is really no reason to
ask patients to incur such expense.
-
EXTRA PORTS: The robot requires at least
one - and many times more - extra ports (incisions) in a patient’s
abdomen. Most of our surgeries require only three incisions. If we
used the da Vinci®, we would need to use four or five ports. Fewer
ports (and often smaller ones), results in much less pain and
shorter recovery.
As the manufacturer addresses these issues
to our satisfaction, I do think there is a possibility that we will be
using the da Vinci® robotic-assisted surgical system in the future, but
it is not ready for us at this time.
back to articles |