• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Value of a dual console in the introduction of robot-assisted colectomy

Value of a dual console in the introduction of robot-assisted colectomy

Yoshiyuki Sakamoto, PhD, Hajime Morohashi, PhD, Takuya Miura, PhD, Kentarou Satou, MD, Kenichi Hakamada, PhD. Hirosaki University

Introduction: Robot-assisted colectomy may compensate for some of the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery by providing detailed high-vision three-dimensional images and magnified vision, forceps joint function, and preventing hand tremors. These attributes of robot surgery may be particularly useful when accurate R0 resection and nerve preservation are required in cases of rectal resection. We performed robot-assisted colectomy for the first time in January 2016. For the first 4 patients whom we treated (the first-stage group), we invited a visiting expert from a high-volume center to perform the procedure jointly with our hospital’s surgeons by using a dual console. For the subsequent 6 patients (the second-stage group), the procedure was performed by our hospital staff alone. In this report, we describe our experience of introduction of robot-assisted colectomy and discuss issues for the future.

Patients and Methods: The operative procedure was sigmoid colectomy, low anterior resection, and intersphincteric resection. The median number of lymph nodes dissected was 15.6. The mean operating time was 337 minutes for the first-stage group and 365 minutes for the second-stage group. The median console time was 206 minutes for the first-stage group and 193 minutes for the second-stage group, with no significant differences between the two groups. The mean operating time other than console time was 127 minutes for the first-stage group and 171 minutes for the second-stage group, significantly longer in the latter group. The mean amount of hemorrhage was 15.5 g in the first-stage group and 31 g in the second-stage group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in the mean length of postoperative hospital stay. None of the patients in either group developed a complication of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher.

Conclusions: The use of  Dual Console system was particularly useful for the introduction of robot-assisted surgery in our hospital. For the patients whom we treated, we found almost no difference in console time between the first- and second-stage groups. The high-quality instruction received via the dual console was considered to have had a beneficial effect on the operators’ learning curve. However, the operations that were set up other than console time, such as roll-in and docking, took significantly longer in the second-stage group when the proctor was not present, and more experience is necessary to reduce the time required for set-up. As this procedure is used in more cases, the focus should be clarifying the advantages of robot-assisted surgery.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 87568

Program Number: P799

Presentation Session: iPoster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

47

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals