Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Kim Jaechul School of Artificial Intelligence, KAIST, Daejeon, Korea.
Int J Med Robot. 2022 Aug;18(4):e2393. doi: 10.1002/rcs.2393. Epub 2022 Mar 31.
To compare laparoscopic camera navigation (LCN) quality between robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).
20 recordings were selected by propensity score matching and subjected to Python® software to generate single frames at one second intervals. For each frame, the pixel where the camera should be centred, based on instrument position, current action (dissection/haemostasis/traction) in the frame, was detected. LCN quality was reviewed by two independent surgeons to evaluate erroneous LCN.
RALS had higher incidence of centred views (83.1 ± 4.02% vs. 76.0 ± 2.38%, p < 0.05) and a shorter distance between actual and optimal frame centres (123.3 ± 9.8 vs. 144.8 ± 13.9, p < 0.05) compared to CLS. Erroneous camera navigations were more frequent in CLS regarding total time of horizontal alignment failure (2.1 ± 2.2 vs. 6.0 ± 5.4 min, p = 0.063) and number of excessive zoom-in visualization (0.1 ± 0.3 vs. 1.9 ± 1.4, p = 0.003).
RALS provided higher LCN quality than did CLS, emphasising the benefits of a surgeon-controlled view.
比较机器人辅助腹腔镜手术（RALS）和传统腹腔镜手术（CLS）的腹腔镜摄像导航（LCN）质量。
通过倾向评分匹配选择 20 个记录，并使用 Python®软件生成以一秒为间隔的单帧。对于每一帧，根据器械位置、当前帧中的操作（解剖/止血/牵引），检测应将相机中心置于哪个像素上。由两名独立的外科医生评估错误的 LCN 来审查 LCN 质量。
RALS 中居中视图的发生率更高（83.1±4.02%比 76.0±2.38%，p<0.05），实际和最佳帧中心之间的距离更短（123.3±9.8 比 144.8±13.9，p<0.05），与 CLS 相比。在总水平对准故障时间（2.1±2.2 比 6.0±5.4 分钟，p=0.063）和过度缩放可视化的次数（0.1±0.3 比 1.9±1.4，p=0.003）方面，CLS 中错误的相机导航更为频繁。
RALS 提供的 LCN 质量高于 CLS，强调了由外科医生控制视角的好处。
