Abstract
The newly introduced da Vinci Xi Surgical System hopes to address the shortcomings of its predecessor, specifically robotic arm restrictions and difficulty working in multiple quadrants. We compare the two robot platforms in multiquadrant surgery at a major colorectal referral center. Forty-four patients in the da Vinci Si group and 26 patients in the Xi group underwent sigmoidectomy or low anterior resection between 2014 and 2016. Patient demographics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were compared using descriptive statistics. Both groups were similar in age, sex, BMI, pelvic surgeries, and ASA class. Splenic flexure was mobilized in more (p = 0.045) da Vinci Xi cases compared to da Vinci Si both for sigmoidectomy (50 vs 15.4%) and low anterior resection (60 vs 29%). There was no significant difference in operative time (219.9 vs 224.7 min; p = 0.640), blood loss (170.0 vs 188.1 mL; p = 0.289), length of stay (5.7 vs 6 days; p = 0.851), or overall complications (26.9 vs 22.7%; p = 0.692) between the da Vinci Xi and Si groups, respectively. Single-dock multiquadrant robotic surgery, measured by splenic flexure mobilization with concomitant pelvic dissection, was more frequently performed using the da Vinci Xi platform with no increase in operative time, bleeding, or postoperative complications. The new platform provides surgeons an easier alternative to the da Vinci Si dual docking or combined robotic/laparoscopic multiquadrant surgery.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wilson MZ, Hollenbeak CS, Stewart DB (2014) Laparoscopic colectomy is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative complications than open colectomy: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis. Colorectal Dis 16:382–389
Frangou C (2016) Robotic procedures continue to soar despite data, financial concerns. General Surgery News. http://www.generalsurgerynews.com/In-the-News/Article/08-16/Robotic-Procedures-Continue-To-Soar-Despite-Data-Financial-Concerns/37243. Accessed 1 Sept 2016
Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ et al (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1346–1355
Speicher PJ, Englum BR, Ganapathi AM, Nussbaum DP, Mantyh CR, Migaly J (2015) Robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a national perspective on short-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg 262:1040–1045
Zimmern A, Prasad L, Desouza A, Marecik S, Park J, Abcarian H (2010) Robotic colon and rectal surgery: a series of 131 cases. World J Surg 34:1954–1958
Allemann P, Duvoisin C, Di Mare L, Hubner M, Demartines N, Hahnloser D (2016) Robotic-assisted surgery improves the quality of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopy: results of a case–controlled analysis. World J Surg 40:1010–1016
Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56:458–466
Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ, Fazio VW (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639
Bae SU, Baek SJ, Hur H, Baik SH, Kim NK, Min SB (2015) Robotic left colon cancer resection: a dual docking technique that maximizes splenic flexure mobilization. Surg Endosc 29:1303–1309
Sng KK, Hara M, Shin JW, Yoo BE, Yang KS, Kim SH (2013) The multiphasic learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery. Surg Endosc 27:3297–3307
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196
Tamhankar AS, Jatal S, Saklani A (2016) Total robotic radical rectal resection with the da Vinci Xi system: single docking, single phase technique. Int J Med Robot. doi:10.1002/rcs.1734 (epub ahead of print)
Morelli L, Guadagni S, Di Franco G, Palmeri M, Caprili G, D’Isidoro C et al (2016) Use of the new da Vinci Xi during robotic rectal resection for cancer: a pilot matched-case comparison with the da Vinci Si. Int J Med Robot 30:1281. doi:10.1002/rcs.1728 (epub ahead of print)
Yuh B, Yu X, Raytis J, Lew M, Fong Y, Lau C (2016) Use of a mobile tower-based robot—the initial Xi robot experience in surgical oncology. J Surg Oncol 113:5–7
Morelli L, Guadagni S, Di Franco G et al (2015) Use of the new Da Vinci Xi during robotic rectal resection for cancer: technical considerations and early experience. Int J Colorectal Dis 30:1281–1283
Trefis T (2016) FDA approval of key instruments could boost sales of Intuitive Surgical’s da Vinci Xi. http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2014/08/27/fda-approval-of-keyinstruments-could-boost-sales-of-intuitive-surgicals-da-vinci-xi/#3c1d08aa3485. Accessed 28 Febr 2016
DeNoto G, Rubach E, Ravikumar TS (2006) A standardized technique for robotically performed sigmoid colectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 16:551–556
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Bogdan Protyniak, Jeffrey Jorden and Russell Farmer declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Protyniak, B., Jorden, J. & Farmer, R. Multiquadrant robotic colorectal surgery: the da Vinci Xi vs Si comparison. J Robotic Surg 12, 67–74 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0689-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0689-x