Over the past decade there has been an exponential increase in the number of robotic-assisted surgical procedures performed in Australia and internationally. Despite this growth, there are no level I or II studies examining the anaesthetic implications of these procedures. Available observational studies provide insight into the significant challenges for the anaesthetist. Most anaesthetic considerations overlap with those of non-robotic surgery. However, issues with limited patient access and extremes of positioning resulting in physiological disturbances and risk of injury are consistently demonstrated concerns specific to robotic-assisted procedures.
KwohY.S., HouJ., JonckheereE.A., HayatiS.A robot with improved absolute positioning accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng1988; 35: 153–160.
6.
DaviesB.L., HibberdR.D., CoptcoatM.J., WickhamJ.E.A surgeon robot prostatectomy—a laboratory evaluation. J Med Eng Technol1989; 13: 273–277.
7.
HarrisS.J., Arambula-CosioF., MeiQ., HibberdR.D., DaviesB.L., WickhamJ.E.The Probot—an active robot for prostate resection. Proc Inst Mech Eng H1997; 211: 317–325.
8.
PaulH.A., BargarW.L., MittlestadtB., MusitsB., TaylorR.H., KazanzidesP.Development of a surgical robot for cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res1992; 285: 57–66.
9.
SchurrM.O., BuessG., NeisiusB., VogesU.Robotics and telemanipulation technologies for endoscopic surgery. A review of the ARTEMIS project. Advanced Robotic Telemanipulator for Minimally Invasive Surgery. Surg Endosc2000; 14: 375–381.
LangJ.E., MannavaS., FloydA.J., GoddardM.S., SmithB.P., MofidiA.Robotic systems in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 1296–1299.
12.
SutherlandG.R., LatourI., GreerA.D.Integrating an image-guided robot with intraoperative MRI: a review of the design and construction of neuroArm. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag2008; 27: 59–65.
13.
YohannesP., RotariuP., PintoP., SmithA.D., LeeB.R.Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve?Urology2002; 60: 39–45.
14.
ChandraV., NehraD., ParentR., WooR., ReyesR., Hernandez-BoussardT., DuttaS.A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices. Surgery2010; 147: 830–839.
15.
StefanidisD., WangF., KorndorfferJ.R.Jr., DunneJ.B., ScottD.J.Robotic assistance improves intracorporeal suturing performance and safety in the operating room while decreasing operator workload. Surg Endosc2010; 24: 377–382.
16.
BarbashG.I., GliedS.A.New technology and health care costs— the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med2010; 363: 701–704.
17.
PapanikolaouI.G.Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic review of the literature. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2014; 24: 478–483.
18.
LaiE.C.H., TangC.N.Long-term survival analysis of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2016; 26: 162–166.
19.
ZanagnoloV., MinigL., RolloD., TomaselliT., AlettiG., BoccioloneL.Clinical and oncologic outcomes of robotic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for women with cervical cancer: experience at a referral cancer center. Int J Gynecol Cancer2016; 26: 568–574.
SwansonS.J., MillerD.L., McKennaR.J.Jr., HowingtonJ., MarshallM.M., YooA.C.Comparing robot-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy with conventional video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy and wedge resection: results from a multihospital database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2014; 147: 929–937.
22.
LeeB.E., KorstR.J., KletsmanE., RutledgeJ.R.Transitioning from video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy to robotics for lung cancer: are there outcomes advantages?J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2014; 147: 724–729.
GargA., DwivediR.C., SayedS., KatnaR., KomorowskiA., PathakK.A.Robotic surgery in head and neck cancer: a review. Oral Oncol2010; 46: 571–576.
25.
DanicM.J., ChowM., AlexanderG., BhandariA., MenonM., BrownM.Anesthesia considerations for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a review of 1,500 cases. J Robot Surg2007; 1: 119–123.
26.
AndonianS., OkekeZ., OkekeD.A., RastinehadA., VanderbrinkB.A., RichstoneL., LeeB.R.Device failures associated with patient injuries during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries: a comprehensive review of FDA MAUDE database. Can J Urol2008; 15: 3912–3916.
27.
KimW.T., HamW., JeongW., SongH.J., RhaK.H., ChoiY.D.Failure and malfunction of da Vinci Surgical systems during various robotic surgeries: experience from six departments at a single institute. Urology2009; 74: 1234–1237.
28.
LestarM., GunnarssonL., LagerstrandL., WiklundP., Odeberg-WernermanS.Hemodynamic perturbations during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in 45 degrees Trendelenburg position. Anesth Analg2011; 113: 1069–1075.
29.
MaerzD.A., BeckL.N., SimA.J., GainsburgD.M.Complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery distant from the surgical site. Br J Anaesth2017; 118: 492–503.
30.
MurphyD.G., HallR., TongR., GoelR., CostelloA.J.Robotic technology in surgery: current status in 2008. ANZ J Surg2008; 78: 1076–1081.
31.
BastoM., SathianathenN., Te MarveldeL., RyanS., GoadJ., LawrentschukN.Patterns-of-care and health economic analysis of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the Australian public health system. BJU Int2016; 117: 930–939.
32.
ParsonsJ.K., BennettJ.L.Outcomes of retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology2008; 72: 412–416.
33.
FicarraV., NovaraG., ArtibaniW., CestariA., GalfanoA., GraefenM.Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol2009; 55: 1037–1063.
34.
YonekuraH., HirateH., SobueK.Comparison of anesthetic management and outcomes of robot-assisted vs pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth2016; 35: 281–286.
35.
FarnhamS.B., WebsterT., HerrellS.D., SmithJ.A.Jr.Intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology2006; 67: 360–363.
HakimiA.A., BlitsteinJ., FederM., ShapiroE., GhavamianR.Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology2009; 73: 119–123.
38.
BerryhillR.Jr., JhaveriJ., YadavR., LeungR., RaoS., El-HakimA., TewariA.Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology2008; 72: 15–23.
39.
MoranP.S., O'NeillM., TeljeurC., FlatteryM., MurphyL.A., SmithG., RyanM.Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Urol2013; 20: 312–321.
FalabellaA., Moore-JeffriesE., SullivanM.J., NelsonR., LewM.Cardiac function during steep Trendelenburg position and CO2 pneumoperitoneum for robotic-assisted prostatectomy: a trans-oesophageal Doppler probe study. Int J Med Robot2007; 3: 312–315.
SodhaS., NazarianS., AdsheadJ.M., VasdevN., MohanSGEffect of pneumoperitoneum on renal function and physiology in patients undergoing robotic renal surgery. Curr Urol2016; 9: 1–4.
44.
KalmarA.F., FoubertL., HendrickxJ.F.A., MottrieA., AbsalomA., MortierE.P., StruysM.M.Influence of steep Trendelenburg position and CO(2) pneumoperitoneum on cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and respiratory homeostasis during robotic prostatectomy. Br J Anaesth2010; 104: 433–439.
45.
ChoiE.M., NaS., ChoiS.H., AnJ., RhaK.H., OhY.J.Comparison of volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation in steep Trendelenburg position for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth2011; 23: 183–188.
46.
SchrammP., TreiberA.H., BerresM., PestelG., EngelhardK., WernerC., CloshenD.Time course of cerebrovascular autoregulation during extreme Trendelenburg position for robotic-assisted prostatic surgery. Anaesthesia2014; 69: 58–63.
47.
CloshenD., TreiberA., BerresM., SebastianiA., WernerC., EngelhardK., SchrammP.Robotic assisted prostatic surgery in the Trendelenburg position does not impair cerebral oxygenation measured using two different monitors: a clinical observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol2014; 31: 104–109.
MannyT.B., GorbachinskyI., HemalA.K.Lower extremity neuropathy after robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and radical cystectomy. Can J Urol2010; 17: 5390–5393.
51.
GezginciE., OzkaptanO., YalcinS., AkinY., RassweilerJ., GozenA.S.Postoperative pain and neuromuscular complications associated with patient positioning after robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective non-placebo and non-randomized study. Int Urol Nephrol2015; 47: 1635–1641.
52.
PhongS.V.N., KohL.K.D.Anaesthesia for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: considerations for laparoscopy in the Trendelenburg position. Anaesth Intensive Care2007; 35: 281–285.
53.
DevarajanJ., ByrdJ.B., GongM.C., WoodH.M., O'HaraJ., WeingartenT.N.Upper and middle trunk brachial plexopathy after robotic prostatectomy. Anesth Analg2012; 115: 867–870.
54.
SukhuT., KrupskiT.L.Patient positioning and prevention of injuries in patients undergoing laparoscopic and robot-assisted urologic procedures. Curr Urol Rep2014; 15: 398.
55.
MumtazF.H., ChewH., GelisterJ.S.Lower limb compartment syndrome associated with the lithotomy position: concepts and perspectives for the urologist. BJU Int2002; 90: 792–799.
56.
WassenaarE.B., van der BrandJ., van der WerkenC.Compartment syndrome of the lower leg after surgery in the modified lithotomy position: report of seven cases. Dis Colon Rectum2006; 49: 1449–1453.
57.
PridgeonS., BishopC.V., AdsheadJ.Lower limb compartment syndrome as a complication of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the UK experience. BJU Int2013; 112: 485–488.
58.
KanK.M., BrownS.E., GainsburgD.M.Ocular complications in robotic-assisted prostatectomy: a review of pathophysiology and prevention. Minerva Anestesiol2015; 81: 557–566.
LeeL.A., PosnerK.L., BruchasR., RothS., DominoK.B.Visual loss after prostatectomy. American Society of Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting, San Diego, 2010.
61.
AwadH., SantilliS., OhrM., RothA., YanW., FernandezS.The effects of steep trendelenburg positioning on intraocular pressure during robotic radical prostatectomy. Anesth Analg2009; 109: 473–478.
62.
HoshikawaY., TsutsumiN., OhkoshiK., SerizawaS., HamadaM., InagakiK.The effect of steep Trendelenburg positioning on intraocular pressure and visual function during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Br J Ophthalmol2014; 98: 305–308.
OksarM., AkbulutZ., OcalH., BalbayM.D., KanbakO.Anesthetic considerations for robotic cystectomy: a prospective study. Braz J Anesthesiol2014; 64: 109–115.
65.
BhandariA., McIntireL., KaulS.A., HemalA.K., PeabodyJ.O., MenonM.Perioperative complications of robotic radical prostatectomy after the learning curve. J Urol2005; 174: 915–918.
66.
PandeyR., GargR., DarlongV., PunjJ., Chandralekha, KumarA.Unpredicted neurological complications after robotic laparoscopic radical cystectomy and ileal conduit formation in steep trendelenburg position: two case reports. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg2010; 61: 163–166.
67.
AwadH., WalkerC.M., ShaikhM., DimitrovaG.T., AbazaR., O'HaraJ.Anesthetic considerations for robotic prostatectomy: a review of the literature. J Clin Anesth2012; 24: 494–504.
68.
BarrC., MadhuriT.K., PrabhuP., Butler-ManuelS., TailorA.Cerebral oedema following robotic surgery: a rare complication. Arch Gynecol Obstet2014; 290: 1041–1044.
69.
PiegelerT., DreesenP., GraberS.M., HaileS.R., SchmidD.M., Beck-SchimmerB.Impact of intraoperative fluid administration on outcome in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy—a retrospective analysis. BMC Anesthesiol2014; 14: 61.
70.
HongJ.Y., KimJ.Y., ChoiY.D., RhaK.H., YoonS.J., KilH.K.Incidence of venous gas embolism during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is lower than that during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Br J Anaesth2010; 105: 777–781.
71.
Soleymani MajdH., FerrariF., GubbalaK., CampanileR.G., TozziR.Latest developments and techniques in gynaecological oncology surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol2015; 27: 291–296.
72.
BrodyF., RichardsN.G.Review of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc2014; 28: 1413–1424.
73.
TrastulliS., FarinellaE., CirocchiR., CavaliereD., AveniaN., SciannameoF.Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis2012; 14: e134–156.
74.
BianchiP.P., CerianiC., LocatelliA., SpinoglioG., ZampinoM.G., SonzogniA.Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of oncological safety and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc2010; 24: 2888–2894.
75.
DaouadiM., ZureikatA.H., ZenatiM.S., ChoudryH., TsungA., BartlettD.L.Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg2013; 257: 128–132.
76.
SudaK., NakauchiM., InabaK., IshidaY., UyamaI.Robotic surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer: current status and future perspectives. Dig Endosc2016; 28: 701–713.
77.
HansS., DelasB., GorpheP., MenardM., BrasnuD.Transoral robotic surgery in head and neck cancer. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis2012; 129: 32–37.
OliveiraC.M., NguyenH.T., FerrazA.R., WattersK., RosmanB., RahbarR.Robotic surgery in otolaryngology and head and neck surgery: a review. Minim Invasive Surg2012; 2012: 286563.
WaltherT., FalkV., MetzS., DiegelerA., BattelliniR., AutschbachR., MohrF.W.Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg1999; 67: 1643–1647.
91.
BushB., NifongL.W., AlwairH., ChitwoodW.R.Jr.Robotic mitral valve surgery–current status and future directions. Ann Cardiothorac Surg2013; 2: 814–817.
92.
BuceriusJ., MetzS., WaltherT., FalkV., DollN., NoackF.Endoscopic internal thoracic artery dissection leads to significant reduction of pain after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Ann Thorac Surg2002; 73: 1180–1184.
93.
LeeJ.D., SrivastavaM., BonattiJ.History and current status of robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass. Circ J2012; 76: 2058–2065.
94.
BonattiJ., WehmanB., de BiasiA.R., JeudyJ., GriffithB., LehrE.J.Totally endoscopic quadruple coronary artery bypass grafting is feasible using robotic technology. Ann Thorac Surg2012; 93: e111–112.
95.
GaoC., YangM., WuY., WangG., XiaoC., ZhaoY., WangJ.Early and midterm results of totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting on the beating heart. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2011; 142: 843–849.
OhtsukaT., ImanakaK., EndohM., KohnoT., NakajimaJ., KotsukaY., TakamotoS.Hemodynamic effects of carbon dioxide insufflation under single–lung ventilation during thoracoscopy. Ann Thorac Surg1999; 68: 29–32.
100.
RaumannsJ., DiegelerA., FalkV., EnderJ., PetryA.Carbon dioxide insufflation under one–lung ventilation for robot–guided thoracoscopic surgery: effects on cardiac filling and cardiac output. Eur J Anaesthesiol2000; 17: 51.
101.
VassiliadesT.A.Jr.The cardiopulmonary effects of single–lung ventilation and carbon dioxide insufflation during thoracoscopic internal mammary artery harvesting. Heart Surg Forum2002; 5: 22–24.
102.
ChauhanS., SukesanS.Anesthesia for robotic cardiac surgery: an amalgam of technology and skill. Ann Card Anaesth2010; 13: 169–175.
103.
Kottenberg–AssenmacherE., KamlerM., PetersJ.Minimally invasive endoscopic port–access intracardiac surgery with one lung ventilation: impact on gas exchange and anaesthesia resources. Anaesthesia2007; 62: 231–238.
104.
HattonK.W., KilinskiL.C., RamaiahC., SchellR.M.Multiple failed external defibrillation attempts during robot–assisted internal mammary harvest for myocardial revascularization. Anesth Analg2006; 103: 1113–1114.
105.
SuriR.M., TaggarseA., BurkhartH.M., DalyR.C., MauermannW., NishimuraR.A.Robotic mitral valve repair for simple and complex degenerative disease: midterm clinical and echocardiographic quality outcomes. Circulation2015; 132: 1961–1968.
106.
RehfeldtK.H., AndreJ.V., RitterM.J.Anesthetic considerations in robotic mitral valve surgery. Ann Cardiothorac Surg2017; 6: 47–53.
107.
DylewskiM.R., OhaetoA.C., PereiraJ.F.Pulmonary resection using a total endoscopic robotic video-assisted approach. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2011; 23: 36–42.
108.
CamposJ.H.An update on robotic thoracic surgery and anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol2010; 23: 1–6.
