Citations 2
Clinical Recommendations for Remote Robotic Assisted Surgery From the CRSA 2025 International Consensus Conference
Raptis, Dimitri Aristotle , Kavoussi, Louis, Wren, Sherry M. , Fowler, Dennis, Anvari, Mehran, Bianco, Francesco, Liang, Xiao, Li, Zheyong, Yin, Xiaoyu, Piccoli, Micaela, Marks, John, Shen, Baiyong, Ko, Clifford, Seeliger, Barbara, Hagendoorn, Jeroen, Essani, Rahila, Walsh, R. Matthew, Oleynikov, Dmitry, Jones, Stephanie B., Bindal, Vivek , Kim, Hyun Koo, Hyung, Woo Jin, Hashimoto, Daniel, Chen, Liaohai Leo, Burt, Bryan M., Lafaro, Kelly, Elli, Fernando, Wilson, Erik, Bianchi, Paolo Pietro, Morgan, Annette, Bartlett, Stephen T., Rashidi, Laila, Yu, Liu, Gawkins, Bill, Hinoul, Piet, Peine, Bill, Woo, Yanghee, Raoof, Mustafa, Jones, Daniel, Deshpande, Supriya, Bernard, Jordana , Wang, Yulun, Broering, Dieter C., Giulianotti, Pier Cristoforo, Fong, Yuman , Raptis, Dimitri , Wren, Sherry M , Aldousari, Saad , Ruurda, Jelle P. H. , Bindal, Vivek , Melstrom, Laleh , Celotto, Francesco , Kudsi, Yusef , Ratti, Francesca , Bernard, Jordana , Kavoussi, Louis R., Fowler, Dennis L. , Anvari, Mehran , Bianco, Francesco Maria , Piccoli, Micaela , Marks, John, Ko, Clifford, Seeliger, Barbara , Hagendoorn, Jeroen , Essani, Rahila, Walsh, R. Matthew , Oleynikov, Dmitry , Hyung, Woo Jin , Hashimoto, Daniel A. , Burt, Bryan M. , Lafaro, Kelly J. , Elli, Fernando, Bianchi, Paolo Pietro, Rashidi, Laila, Hinoul, Piet , Peine, Bill, Woo, Yanghee , Raoof, Mustafa , Jones, Daniel, Deshpande, Supriya , Bröering, Dieter C. , Giulianotti, Pier Cristoforo
World Journal of Surgery | July 14, 2026 | Volume: 50 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 2274-2288
ABSTRACT Background Implementation of remote robotic‐assisted surgery (rRAS) has the potential to significantly improve access to high‐quality surgical care for patients worldwide. Advances in robotic systems and telecommunications now enable highly reliable, low latency, and cybersecure connectivity. These technological developments, together with the broader adoption of telemedicine, have driven an increasing interest in the implementation of rRAS. Methods The Clinical Robotic Surgery Association (CRSA) convened a conference to develop international clinical recommendations for rRAS using the Danish Model of Consensus. The society identified five key issue categories and invited a panel of experts to address specific questions for each. Panel members and a jury of 10 unbiased, non‐expert in rRAS professionals participated in a day‐long conference on November 19, 2025 (Los Angeles, USA). During the conference, participants presented, discussed, and reached consensus on specific guidelines relevant to each category. Immediately after the conference, the jury reviewed and approved the recommended guidelines. Results Multiple recommendations were approved for each of the following categories: Operating Models, Roles and Responsibilities (2 recommendations), Clinical Pathway (2 recommendations), Emergency Management (8 recommendations), Technical Considerations (5 recommendations), and Medico‐legal and Ethical Considerations (4 recommendations). Conclusions There was consensus that with recent advances in telecommunication and robotic technologies, rRAS can be offered safely and effectively if the identified safeguards are realized. Adoption of rRAS is expected to continue advancing rapidly.
The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection
Asbun, Horacio J. , Moekotte, Alma , Vissers, Frederique L., Kunzler, F. , Cipriani, Federica , D’Angelica, Michael I. , Balduzzi, Alberto , Bassi, Claudio , Björnsson, Bergþór , Boggi, Ugo , Callery, Mark P., Chiaro, Marco Del , Coimbra, Felipe José Fernández , Conrad, Claudius , Cook, Andrew , Coppola, Alessandro , Dervenis, Christos, Dokmak, Safi , Edil, Barish H. , Giulianotti, Pier Cristoforo , Hansen, Paul D., Heijde, Nicky van der , Hilst, Jony van , Hester, Caitlin A. , Hogg, Melissa E. , Jarufe, Nicolás , Jeyarajah, D. Rohan, Kim, Song Cheol, Khatkov, Igor , Kokudo, Norihiro , Kooby, David A. , Korrel, Maarten , Leon, Francisco J. de, Lluís, Núria , Lof, Sanne , Demartines, Nicolas , Merchant, Nipun B. , Molenaar, I. Quintus, Moravek, Cassadie, Mou, Yiping , Nealon, William H. , Palanivelu, Chinnusamy, Pessaux, Patrick , Pitt, Henry A. , Primrose, John N., Rawashdeh, Arab , Sanford, Dominic E. , Senthilnathan, Palanisamy, Shrikhande, Shailesh V. , Stauffer, John , Takaori, Kyoichi , Tang, Chung Ngai, Vollmer, Charles M., Wakabayashi, Go , Walsh, R. Matthew , Wang, Shin-E, Zinner, Michael J. , Wolfgang, Christopher L. , Zureikat, Amer H. , Zwart, M. , Conlon, Kevin C. , Kendrick, Michael L., Zeh, Herbert J. , Hilal, Mohammad Abu, Besselink, Marc G. , Primrose, John , Hilal, Mohammad Abu , Demartines, N , A Stauffer, John , Alseidi, Adnan A. , Edwin, Bjørn , Han, Ho-Seong , Jeyarajah, D. Rohan , Keck, Tobias , Machado, Marcel Autran C. , Martinie, John B. , Moravek, Cassadie, Nakamura, Masafumi , Palanivelu, Chinnusamy , Polanco, Patricio Marcelo , Talamonti, Marina , Wang, Shin‐E , Kendrick, Michael L. , Besselink, Marc G , Cipriani, Federica
Annals of Surgery | September 22, 2019 | Volume: 271 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 1-14
Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.