Nothing to acknowledge.

<ol>
	<li>Tseng, J. F., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+learning+curve+in+pancreatic+surgery.">The learning curve in pancreatic surgery.</a> Surgery. 141, 456-463 (2007).</li><li>Cameron, J. L., He, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Two+Thousand+Consecutive+Pancreaticoduodenectomies.">Two Thousand Consecutive Pancreaticoduodenectomies.</a> Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 220, 530-536 (2015).</li><li>Birkmeyer, J., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Effect+of+hospital+volume+on+in-hospital+mortality+with+pancreaticoduodenectomy.">Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy.</a> Surgery. 125, 250-256 (1999).</li><li>Cirocchi, R., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+systematic+review+on+robotic+pancreaticoduodenectomy.">A systematic review on robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.</a> Surgical Oncology. 22, 238-246 (2013).</li><li>Giulianotti, P. C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Robotics+in+general+surgery:+personal+experience+in+a+large+community+hospital.">Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital.</a> Archives of surgery. 138, 777-784 (2003).</li><li>Wang, S. -. E., Shyr, B. -. U., Chen, S. -. C., Shyr, Y. -. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Comparison+between+robotic+and+open+pancreaticoduodenectomy+with+modified+Blumgart+pancreaticojejunostomy:+A+propensity+score-matched+study.">Comparison between robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy with modified Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy: A propensity score-matched study.</a> Surgery. 164 (6), 1162-1167 (2018).</li><li>Magge, D., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Robotic+pancreatoduodenectomy+at+an+experienced+institution+is+not+associated+with+an+increased+risk+of+post-pancreatic+hemorrhage.">Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy at an experienced institution is not associated with an increased risk of post-pancreatic hemorrhage.</a> HPB. 20, 448-455 (2018).</li><li>Zureikat, A. H., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Minimally+invasive+hepatopancreatobiliary+surgery+in+North+America:+an+ACS-NSQIP+analysis+of+predictors+of+conversion+for+laparoscopic+and+robotic+pancreatectomy+and+hepatectomy.">Minimally invasive hepatopancreatobiliary surgery in North America: an ACS-NSQIP analysis of predictors of conversion for laparoscopic and robotic pancreatectomy and hepatectomy.</a> The official journal of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Association. 19, 595-602 (2017).</li><li>Zureikat, A. H., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+Multi-institutional+Comparison+of+Perioperative+Outcomes+of+Robotic+and+Open+Pancreaticoduodenectomy.">A Multi-institutional Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic and Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy.</a> Annals of Surgery. 264, 640-649 (2016).</li><li>McMillan, M. T., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+Propensity+Score-Matched+Analysis+of+Robotic+vs+Open+Pancreatoduodenectomy+on+Incidence+of+Pancreatic+Fistula.">A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Robotic vs Open Pancreatoduodenectomy on Incidence of Pancreatic Fistula.</a> JAMA Surgery. 152 (4), 327-335 (2016).</li><li>Nguyen, K., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Technical+Aspects+of+Robotic-Assisted+Pancreaticoduodenectomy+(RAPD).">Technical Aspects of Robotic-Assisted Pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD).</a> Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 15, 870-875 (2011).</li><li>Zureikat, A. H., Nguyen, K. T., Bartlett, D. L., Zeh, H. J., Moser, J. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Robotic-Assisted+Major+Pancreatic+Resection+and+Reconstruction.">Robotic-Assisted Major Pancreatic Resection and Reconstruction.</a> Archives of Surgery. 146, 256-261 (2011).</li><li>Knab, M. L., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Evolution+of+a+Novel+Robotic+Training+Curriculum+in+a+Complex+General+Surgical+Oncology+Fellowship.">Evolution of a Novel Robotic Training Curriculum in a Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship.</a> Annals in Surgical Oncology. 25 (12), 3445-3452 (2018).</li><li>Wu, J., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Recurrent+GNAS+mutations+define+an+unexpected+pathway+for+pancreatic+cyst+development.">Recurrent GNAS mutations define an unexpected pathway for pancreatic cyst development.</a> Science Translational Medicine. 3, 92 (2011).</li><li>Singhi, A. D., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=American+Gastroenterological+Association+guidelines+are+inaccurate+in+detecting+pancreatic+cysts+with+advanced+neoplasia:+a+clinicopathologic+study+of+225+patients+with+supporting+molecular+data.">American Gastroenterological Association guidelines are inaccurate in detecting pancreatic cysts with advanced neoplasia: a clinicopathologic study of 225 patients with supporting molecular data.</a> Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 83, 1107-1117 (2016).</li><li>Tanaka, M., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Revisions+of+international+consensus+Fukuoka+guidelines+for+the+management+of+IPMN+of+the+pancreas.">Revisions of international consensus Fukuoka guidelines for the management of IPMN of the pancreas.</a> Pancreatology. 17, 738-753 (2017).</li><li>Malka, D., Castan, F., Conroy, T. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=FOLFIRINOX+Adjuvant+Therapy+for+Pancreatic+Cancer.">FOLFIRINOX Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer.</a> New England Journal of Medicine. 380, 1187-1189 (2019).</li><li>Nassour, I., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Robotic+Versus+Laparoscopic+Pancreaticoduodenectomy:+a+NSQIP+Analysis.">Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a NSQIP Analysis.</a> Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Official Journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 21, 1784-1792 (2017).</li><li>Gabriel, E., Thirunavukarasu, P., Attwood, K., Nurkin, S. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=National+disparities+in+minimally+invasive+surgery+for+pancreatic+tumors.">National disparities in minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic tumors.</a> Surgical Endoscopy. 31, 398-409 (2017).</li><li>Konstantinidis, I. T., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Robotic+total+pancreatectomy+with+splenectomy:+technique+and+outcomes.">Robotic total pancreatectomy with splenectomy: technique and outcomes.</a> Surgical Endoscopy. 32, 3691-3696 (2018).</li><li>Kornaropoulos, M., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Total+robotic+pancreaticoduodenectomy:+a+systematic+review+of+the+literature.">Total robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review of the literature.</a> Surgical Endoscopy. 31, 4382-4392 (2017).</li><li>Boone, B. A., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Assessment+of+Quality+Outcomes+for+Robotic+Pancreaticoduodenectomy:+Identification+of+the+Learning+Curve.">Assessment of Quality Outcomes for Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Identification of the Learning Curve.</a> JAMA Surgery. 150, 416-422 (2015).</li><li>Fisher, W. E., Hodges, S. E., Wu, M. -. F. F., Hilsenbeck, S. G., Brunicardi, F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Assessment+of+the+learning+curve+for+pancreaticoduodenectomy.">Assessment of the learning curve for pancreaticoduodenectomy.</a> American Journal of Surgery. 203, 684-690 (2012).</li><li>Hmidt, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Effect+of+hospital+volume,+surgeon+experience,+and+surgeon+volume+on+patient+outcomes+after+pancreaticoduodenectomy:+a+single-institution+experience.">Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience.</a> Archives of Surgery. 145, 634-640 (2010).</li><li>Zureikat, A. H., Hogg, M. E., Zeh, H. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+Utility+of+the+Robot+in+Pancreatic+Resections.">The Utility of the Robot in Pancreatic Resections.</a> Advances in Surgery. 48, 77-95 (2014).</li></ol>

Nothing to disclose.

With advances in the surgical technology, laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgeries are being increasingly used in gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary procedures. Conventional laparoscopy is associated with benefits over open surgery for many procedures. However, inherent limitations such as decreased surgical dexterity, suboptimal ergonomics, lack of wristed instruments, and 2-D visualization, have limited its dissemination to complex gastrointestinal operations such as PD.&#160;
Contrary to l...

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex operation that combines a challenging resection and a meticolous reconstruction. During its early inception, the traditional open approach was frought with high complication rates and a mortality rate approaching 25%. In the last three decades, improvements in the surgical technique and perioperative care led to corresponding improvements in outcomes, with a reduction in mortality to less than 5%, especially at high volume centers1,2,3. Despite this, morbidity remains substantial. With advancements in surgical technology, minimally invasive surgical approaches through laparoscopy or robot-assisted surgery have emerged in an effort to curb this morbidity. Since its first report in 2003, interest in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has grown by pancreatic surgeons4,5. Inherent advantages of the robotic platform, including three-dimensional (3D) vision, wristed instruments, and improved ergonomics, allow the surgeon to recapitulate principles of open PD (OPD) in a minimally invasive manner, including safe oncologic dissection, hemostasis, and meticulous reconstruction4,6,7,8,9,10. The goal of this manuscript is to provide the detailed steps of an RPD performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC)11,12,13.
In the presented case study, a 42-year-old female with a previous history of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN), initially presented with acute pancreatitis. Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen revealed a 3.3 cm pancreatic head lesion with associated dilatation of the main pancreatic duct (Figure 1A,B), with a mixed type IPMN. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) confirmed the existence of an irregular, heterogenous cyst measuring 3.1 x 2.0 cm in the pancreatic head with mixed solid and cystic components and main PD duct dilation (Figure 1C). EUS cytology revealed the presence of atypical cells with no high-risk molecular mutations14,15. Biochemical workup including serum tumor markers were normal, with CA19-9 12 U/mL. Based on the Fukuoka criteria, this patient was recommended to have a PD and was deemed a suitable candidate for the robotic approach16.

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:973px;" width="972">
	<colgroup>
		<col span="2" />
		<col />
		<col />
	</colgroup>
	<tbody>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">3-0 V-Loc sutures</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">VLOCMo614</td>
			<td style="width:273px;">Barbed Absorable Suture</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">4-5 Fr Freeman Pancreatic Flexi-Stent</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Hobbs Medical (Stafford Springs, CT)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">6542, 6552</td>
			<td>Pancreatic Duct Stent</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">5-0 PDS (polydiosxanone)</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Ethicon (Somerville, NJ)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">D10063</td>
			<td>Synthetic Absorbable Suture</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Cad&#237;ere forceps</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470049</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Da Vinci Si</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;"></td>
			<td>Surgical Robot</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Da Vinci Xi</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;"></td>
			<td>Surgical Robot</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Endo Clip 10 mm Applier</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Covidien (Dublin, Ireland)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">176619</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Titanium Clip Applier</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="63">
			<td height="63" style="height:63px;width:291px;">Endo GIA 45 mm Curved Tip Articulating Vascular Stapler with Tri-Stapler Technology</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Covidien (Dublin, Ireland)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">EGIA45CTAVM</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Surgical Stapler</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="42">
			<td height="42" style="height:42px;width:291px;">Endo GIA 60 mm Articulating Stapler with Tri-Stapler Technology</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Covidien (Dublin, Ireland)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">EGIA60AMT</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Surgical Stapler</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="63">
			<td height="63" style="height:63px;width:291px;">Endo GIA 60 mm Curved Tip Articulating Vascular Stapler with Tri-Stapler Technology</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Covidien (Dublin, Ireland)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">EGIA60CTAVM</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Surgical Stapler</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">EndoCatch Gold 10 mm Specimen Pouch</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">173050G</td>
			<td>Specimen Extraction Bag</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">EndoCatch II 15 mm Specimen Pouch</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">173049</td>
			<td>Specimen Extraction Bag</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Fenestrated bipolar forceps</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470205</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">GelPOINT Mini Advanced Access Platform</td>
			<td>Applied Medical (Rancho Santa Margarita, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">CNGL3</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Abdominal Access Platform</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Large needle driver</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470006</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Large SutureCut needle driver</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470296</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="42">
			<td height="42" style="height:42px;width:291px;">LigaSure Blunt Tip Laparoscopic Sealer/Divider</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Medtronic (Minneapolis, MN)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">LF1844</td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Bioplar Device</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Mediflex liver retractor</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Mediflex (Islandia NY)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;"></td>
			<td>Laparoscopic Liver Retractor</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Monopolar curved scissors</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470179</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">Permanent cautery hook</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470183</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="21">
			<td height="21" style="height:21px;width:291px;">ProGrasp forceps</td>
			<td style="width:291px;">Intuitive (Sunnyvale, CA)</td>
			<td style="width:119px;">470093</td>
			<td>Surgical Robot Instrument</td>
		</tr>
	</tbody>
</table>

technical detail for robot assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy

Since its first report in 2003, robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has gained popularity among pancreatic surgeons. Inherent advantages of the robotic platform, including three-dimensional vision, wristed instruments, and improved ergonomics, allow the surgeon to recapitulate the principles of open pancreatoduodenectomy allowing safe oncologic dissection, hemostasis, and meticulous reconstruction. Over the course of the past decade, significant strides have been achieved in outlining the safety, feasibility, and learning curve of the robotic Whipple. When performed by high volume pancreatic surgeons experienced in RPD, recent comparative effectiveness studies show potential advantages compared to the open technique, including reductions in hospital stay and morbidity. National data also show reductions in conversion rates compared to its laparoscopic counterpart. Although long-term oncologic data are still needed, short-term oncologic surrogates of margin resection and lymph node harvest suggest no compromise in oncologic outcomes. As pancreatic surgeons increasingly integrate robotics into their practice, proficiency-based training and credentialing will be necessary for the safe application and dissemination of RPD. Here, we provide the detailed steps of a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.&#160;

In the representative case, the total operative time was 225 min with an estimated blood loss (EBL) of 50 mL (Table 1). The patient was admitted to the surgical ward. Her postoperative course followed the UPMC institutional ERAS pathway. We routinely assess JP amylase at POD#1 and #3 to assess for pancreatic fistula and practice early drain removal on POD 3-5 when possible. The patient&#8217;s JP amylase levels were 403 U/L and 68 U/L, respectively. Therefore, the drain was removed on POD#3. The patient ...

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Technical Detail for Robot Assisted Pancreaticoduodenectomy at JoVE.com

Technical Detail for Robot Assisted Pancreaticoduodenectomy

The following manuscript details a stepwise approach to the robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

Since its first report in 2003, robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has gained popularity among pancreatic surgeons. Inherent advantages of the robotic ...

technical-detail-for-robot-assisted-pancreaticoduodenectomy

Research

JoVE Journal

Medicine

14.2K Views.  University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. The following manuscript details a stepwise approach to the robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

Video: Technical Detail for Robot Assisted Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision

Reference scanners are used in dental medicine to verify a lot of procedures. The main interest is to verify impression methods as they serve as a base for dental restorations. The current limitation of many reference scanners is the lack of accuracy scanning large objects like full dental arches, or the limited possibility to assess detailed tooth surfaces. A new reference scanner, based on focus variation scanning technique, was evaluated with regards to highest local and general accuracy. A specific scanning protocol was tested to scan original tooth surface from dental impressions. Also, different model materials were verified. The results showed a high scanning accuracy of the reference scanner with a mean deviation of 5.3 &#177; 1.1 &#181;m for trueness and 1.6 &#177; 0.6 &#181;m for precision in case of full arch scans. Current dental impression methods showed much higher deviations (trueness: 20.4 &#177; 2.2 &#181;m, precision: 12.5 &#177; 2.5 &#181;m) than the internal scanning accuracy of the reference scanner. Smaller objects like single tooth surface can be scanned with an even higher accuracy, enabling the system to assess erosive and abrasive tooth surface loss. The reference scanner can be used to measure differences for a lot of dental research fields. The different magnification levels combined with a high local and general accuracy can be used to assess changes of single teeth or restorations up to full arch changes.

Accuracy is a major demand in dental medicine. To verify accuracy, reference scanners are needed. This article presents a new reference scanner with an adjusted scanning method to acquire a broad variety of dental morphologies with high trueness and precision.

Reference scanners are used in dental medicine to verify a lot of procedures. The main interest is to verify impression methods as they serve as a base ...

A Novel Murine Model of Arteriovenous Fistula Failure: The Surgical Procedure in Detail

The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) still suffers from a high number of failures caused by insufficient remodeling and intimal hyperplasia from which the exact pathophysiology remains unknown. In order to unravel the pathophysiology a murine model of AVF-failure was developed in which the configuration of the anastomosis resembles the preferred situation in the clinical setting. A model was described in which an AVF is created by connecting the venous end of the branch of the external jugular vein to the side of the common carotid artery using interrupted sutures. At a histological level, we observed progressive stenotic intimal lesions in the venous outflow tract that is also seen in failed human AVFs. Although this procedure can be technically challenging due to the small dimensions of the animal, we were able to achieve a surgical success rate of 97% after sufficient training. The key advantage of a murine model is the availability of transgenic animals. In view of the different proposed mechanisms that are responsible for AVF failure, disabling genes that might play a role in vascular remodeling can help us to unravel the complex pathophysiology of AVF failure.

Here we present a murine model of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) failure in which a clinically relevant anastomotic configuration is incorporated. This model can be used to study the pathophysiology and to test possible therapeutic interventions.

The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) still suffers from a high number of failures caused by insufficient remodeling and intimal hyperplasia from which the ...

Modified Single-Loop Reconstruction for Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Modified single-loop reconstruction in pancreaticoduodenectomy separates pancreatic secretion from bile. It is performed in cases of high-risk pancreatic remnants to reduce the severity of postoperative pancreatic fistulas and moreover the overall postoperative morbidity. This reconstruction technique is characterized by an extra-long jejunal loop for the construction of the pancreaticojejunostomy and hepaticojejunostomy. The longer distance between these anastomoses and an additional jejuno-jejunostomy between the afferent and efferent limb of the hepaticojejunostomy separate the fluids and prevent backflow of bile towards the pancreaticojejunostomy. Thus, the secretions cannot activate each other and aggravate an existing anastomotic leakage. We observed a reduced rate of severe postoperative pancreatic fistulas after modified single-loop reconstruction compared to conventional single loop reconstruction. The technique is easy to perform, safe, and less time-consuming than a traditional double-loop reconstruction.

The technique of modified single-loop reconstruction following pancreaticoduodenectomy separates pancreatic secretion from bile, thus reducing the severity of POPF without prolonging the duration of surgery.

Modified single-loop reconstruction in pancreaticoduodenectomy separates pancreatic secretion from bile. It is performed in cases of high-risk pancreatic ...

Robot-Assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Including Resection and Reconstruction of the Spleno-Mesenteric Junction

This article shows the technique of robot-assisted radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy, including resection and reconstruction of the spleno-mesenteric junction, for cancer of the body-tail of the pancreas. The patient is placed supine with the legs parted and a pneumoperitoneum is established and maintained at 10 mmHg. To use the surgical system, four 8 mm ports and one 12 mm port are required. The optic port is placed at the umbilicus. The other ports are placed, on either side, along the pararectal line and the anterior axillary line at the level of the umbilical line. The assistant port (12 mm) is placed along the right pararectal line. Dissection begins by detaching the gastrocolic ligament, thus opening the lesser sac, and by a wide mobilization of the splenic flexure of the colon. The superior mesenteric vein is identified along the inferior border of the pancreas. Lymph node number 8a is removed to permit clear visualization of the common hepatic artery. A tunnel is then created behind the neck of the pancreas. To permit safe resection and reconstruction of the spleno-mesenteric junction, further preemptive dissection is required before dividing the pancreatic neck to bring in clear view all relevant vascular pedicles. Next, the splenic artery is ligated and divided, and the pancreatic neck is divided, with selective ligature of the pancreatic duct. After vein resection and reconstruction, dissection proceeds to complete the clearance of peripancreatic arteries that are peeled off from all lympho-neural tissues. Both celiac ganglia are removed en-bloc with the specimen. The Gerota fascia covering the upper pole of the left kidney is also removed en-bloc with the specimen. Division of short gastric vessels and splenectomy complete the procedure. A drain is left near the pancreatic stump. The round ligament of the liver is mobilized to protect the vessels.

The robotic technique shown herein aims at faithfully reproducing the open procedure for radical treatment of cancer of the body-tail of the pancreas. The protocol also demonstrates the ability to master involvement of major peripancreatic vessels without conversion to open surgery.

This article shows the technique of robot-assisted radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy, including resection and reconstruction of the ...

OP-IVM: Combining In vitro Maturation after Oocyte Retrieval with Gynecological Surgery

The use of in vitro maturation (IVM) before gynecological operation (OP-IVM) is an extension of conventional IVM that combines IVM following oocyte retrieval with routine gynecological surgery. OP-IVM is suitable for patients undergoing benign gynecological surgery who have the need for fertility preservation (FP) or infertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). In the operating room, patients undergoing benign gynecological surgery are first anesthetized and receive ultrasound-guided immature follicle aspiration (IMFA) treatment. As the subsequent gynecological surgery is performed, the cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) are examined, and the immature COCs are transferred into the IVM medium and cultured for 28-32 hours in the IVF laboratory. After assessment, mature oocytes in the MII stage will be selected and cryopreserved in liquid nitrogen for FP or fertilized by intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for IVF-ET. By combining IVM with gynecological surgery, immature oocytes that would have been discarded can be saved and used for assisted reproductive technology (ART). The procedure, significance and critical aspects of OP-IVM are described in this article.

In vitro maturation (IVM) before gynecological operation (OP-IVM) combines IVM following oocyte retrieval with routine gynecological surgery and serves as an extension of conventional IVM applications for fertility preservation.

The use of in vitro maturation (IVM) before gynecological operation (OP-IVM) is an extension of conventional IVM that combines IVM following oocyte ...

Robot-Assisted Kidney Transplantation

This paper describes robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) from a living donor. The robot is docked between the parted legs of the patient, placed in the supine Trendelenburg position. Kidney allografts are provided by a living donor. Before vascular anastomosis, the kidney allograft is prepared by inserting a double-J stent in the ureter, and the temperature for the anastomosis is lowered by wrapping it in an ice-packed gauze. A 12 mm or 8 mm port for the robotic camera and three 8 mm ports for robotic arms are placed. A peritoneal pouch is created for the kidney allograft by raising the peritoneal flaps on both sides over the psoas muscle before dissecting the iliac vessels and bladder. A 6 cm Pfannenstiel incision is made to insert the kidney into the peritoneal pouch, lateral to the right iliac vessels. 
After clamping the external iliac vein with Bulldogs clamps, a venotomy is performed, and the graft renal vein is anastomosed to the external iliac vein in an end-to-side continuous manner with a 6/0 polytetrafluoroethylene suture. After clamping the graft renal vein, the iliac vein is declamped. This is followed by clamping of the external iliac artery, arteriotomy, arterial anastomosis with a 6/0 polytetrafluoroethylene suture, clamping of the graft renal artery, and declamping of the external iliac artery. Reperfusion is then carried out, and ureteroneocystostomy is performed using the Lich-Gregoir technique. The peritoneum is closed at a few locations with polymer locking clips, and a closed-suction drain is placed through one of the working ports. After deflating the pneumoperitoneum, all incisions are closed.

This paper provides technical details for robot-assisted kidney transplantation from a living donor.

This paper describes robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) from a living donor. The robot is docked between the parted legs of the patient, placed ...

Robot-assisted Total Mesorectal Excision and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Locally Advanced Middle-low Rectal Cancer

Since their approval for clinical use, da Vinci surgical robots have shown great advantages in gastrointestinal surgical operations, especially in complex procedures. The high-quality 3-D visual, multijoint arm and natural tremor filtration allow the surgeon to expose and dissect more accurately with minimal invasion. Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical technique for the treatment of resectable rectal cancer. To reduce the lateral recurrence rate, lateral pelvic lymph node dissection can be performed, as it is a safe and feasible procedure for locally advanced middle-low rectal cancer with a high possibility of metastasis to the lateral lymph nodes. However, the complexity of the anatomic structures and the high postoperative complication rate limit its application. Recently, several surgeons have increasingly used robotic techniques for total mesorectal excision and lateral pelvic lymph node dissection. Compared with open and laparoscopic surgery, the robotic technique has several advantages, such as less blood loss, fewer blood transfusions, minimal trauma, shorter postoperative hospitalization, and quicker recovery. A robotic approach is generally regarded as a reasonable alternative for complicated procedures such as lateral pelvic lymph node dissection, although there are a limited number of high-quality prospective randomized controlled studies reporting direct evidence. Here, we provide the detailed steps of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and lateral pelvic lymph node dissection performed at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi&#39;an Jiaotong University.

The robotic technique described herein aims to detail a stepwise approach to robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for locally advanced (T3/T4) rectal cancer located below the peritoneal reflection.

Since their approval for clinical use, da Vinci surgical robots have shown great advantages in gastrointestinal surgical operations, especially in complex ...

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

The technique of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and initial experience with it at a single center are provided. The technique is described step-by-step and further illustrated by a video to enhance reproducibility. Early oncological and functional results were evaluated. In total, 77 patients were included with a median follow-up of 11 months (range: 3-21 months). Fifty-one percent of patients had local high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer. There were no intra-operative complications, and all high-grade complications (2.6%) were related to pelvic lymph node dissection performed concomitant with RS-RARP. Median operation time was 160 min (range: 122-265 min) and median hospital stay was 3 (range: 3-8) days. A positive surgical margin was reported in 42.9%. One-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was 90.1%. After 6 months, all patients were socially continent and after 1 year, 94.3% were fully continent. Of sexually active patients who underwent at least unilateral nerve-sparing, 43.3% were able to have sexual intercourse. This series underlines the surgical safety of performing RS-RARP by a standardized technique and confirms the beneficial effect on the early return of continence. The patient needs to be informed about the risk of a positive surgical margin.

Robot-assisted Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy is a technique that enables to preserve urinary continence or facilitates recovery of urinary continence in the majority of patients. Patients must be informed about the risk of a positive surgical margin.

The technique of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and initial experience with it at a single center are provided. The ...

A Modified Vessel-Sparing Microsurgical Vasoepididymostomy

Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy (MVE) is the main surgical treatment for epididymal obstruction. The vasal vessels are ligated during MVE. However, preserving the vasal vessels during MVE might better simulate the normal physiological structure and be meaningful for patients who have undergone varicocelectomy. Nevertheless, preserving the vasal vessels might elevate the risk of increasing the tension of anastomosis, affecting the patency rate and leading to delayed postoperative bleeding. Therefore, we developed a novel vessel-sparing MVE to make it safer. Here is a summary of the improvements to the procedure. 1) The retrograde dissociation of the vasal vessels on the proximal testicular side was adopted as the main method, and the anterograde dissociation of the vasal vessels on the distal testicular side was adopted as a supplement to dissociate the vasal vessels to be preserved. This improvement ensures the blood supply to the vas deferens that will be used for anastomosis and also provides longer vasal vessels, which reduces the tension of anastomosis. 2) By fixing the vas deferens to be anastomosed and the broken end of the vas deferens, the free vasal vessels get fixed, which resolves the problem of transmission of vas tension to the vasal vessels and reduces the risk of vasal vessel hemorrhage. 3) Dissociation of the vas deferens after opening the tunica vaginalis increases the mobilization of the vas deferens, which also makes the new procedure easier to complete. The evaluation of the outcomes of this new procedure showed that no significant postoperative complications occurred in the patients, and the patency rate was no different from that of the conventional procedure. Therefore, this new, improved procedure can be considered safe, with satisfactory postoperative results.

Here, we present a protocol to preserve the vasal vessels in microsurgical vasoepididymostomy. The surgical security is enhanced by preserving the vasal vessels using a retrograde-anterograde dissociation and fixing the vasal vessels.

Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy (MVE) is the main surgical treatment for epididymal obstruction. The vasal vessels are ligated during MVE. However, ...

Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Femoral Neck System in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture

Cannulated screw fixation is the main therapy for femoral neck fractures, especially in young patients. The traditional surgical procedure uses C-arm fluoroscopy to place the screw freehand and requires several guide wire adjustments, which increases the operation time and radiation exposure. Repeated drilling can also cause damage to the blood supply and bone quality of the femoral neck, which can be followed by complications such as screw loosening, nonunion, and femoral head necrosis. In order to make fixation more precise and reduce the incidence of complications, our team applied robot-assisted orthopedic surgery for screw placement using the femoral neck system to modify the traditional procedure. This protocol introduces how to import a patient's X-ray information into the system, how to perform screw path planning in software, and how the robotic arm assists in screw placement. Using this method, the surgeons can place the screw successfully the first time, improve the accuracy of the procedure, and avoid radiation exposure. The whole protocol includes the diagnosis of femoral neck fracture; the collection of intraoperative X-ray images; screw path planning in the software; precise placement of the screw under the assistance of the robotic arm by the surgeon; and verification of the implant placement.

This article introduces a method of robot-assisted orthopedic surgery for screw placement during the treatment of femoral neck fracture using the femoral neck system, which allows for more accurate screw placement, improved surgical efficiency, and fewer complications.

Cannulated screw fixation is the main therapy for femoral neck fractures, especially in young patients. The traditional surgical procedure uses C-arm ...