The concentration of console surgeons: prospective evaluation of the loss of attention in robotic-assisted procedures

"Single-Surgeon" versus "Dual-Surgeon" Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph-nodes Dissection: Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes

PURPOSE

To compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with pelvic lymph-nodes dissection (PLND) when the same surgeon performs RARP and PLND versus one surgeon performs RARP and another surgeon performs PLND.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2022 to March 2023, data of consecutive patients who underwent RARP with PLND were prospectively collected. The surgeries were performed by two "young" surgeons with detailed profile. Specifically for the study purpose, one surgeon performed RARP, and the other surgeon performed PLND. A set of surgeries performed according to the standard setup (i.e., the same surgeon performing both RARP and PLND) was retrieved from the institutional database and used as comparator arm. To test the study hypothesis, patients were divided into two groups: "dual-surgeon" versus "single-surgeon".

RESULTS

Fifty patients underwent RARP and PLND performed according to dual-surgeon setup and were compared to the last 50 procedures performed according to the standard single-surgeon setup. Patients in the groups had comparable baseline characteristics. Dual-surgeon interventions had significantly shorter median total operative (194 [IQR 178-215] versus 174 [IQR 146-195] minutes, p<0.001) and console time (173 [IQR 158-194] versus 154 [IQR 129-170] minutes, p<0.001). No significant differences were found in terms of blood loss, intraoperative complications, postoperative outcomes, and final pathology results.

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis found that when RARP and PLND are split onto two surgeons, the operative time is shorter by 20 minutes compared to when a single surgeon performs RARP and PLND. This is an interesting finding that could sponsor further studies.

A prospective study of the components of operating room utilisation time for robotic urological surgery in a public teaching hospital setting

Introduction and aim:

Although there are several publications on learning curves and patient outcomes in robotic surgery, the literature is lacking in depth analysis of operating room (OR) utilisation time which is an expansive healthcare resource for robotic surgery, especially in urology. Thus, we aimed to study individual operating theatre component times in order to improve performance and efficacy.

Method:

A cross-specialty robotic-surgery programme was established at our institution in mid-June 2016 using the daVinci Xi dual console robot. A detailed database was established before initiation of the project. The times taken for each element of the preparation and completion of robotic urological procedure were collected by an independent nurse for all the procedures. Primary outcome measures were total OR time, operative time and console time. Secondary outcome measures were port placement time, set-up time and non-operative time. The statistical significance was calculated by using the Student’s t-test, Fisher’s exact test or Wilcoxon matched pairs test where appropriate.

Result:

Thirty consecutive urological cases were analysed. Mean total OR time, operative time and console time were 320.86 (range 172–485), 235.7 (124–295) and 152.3 min (66–219) respectively. Console time accounted for about less than half of OR time. A significant proportion of OR time was non-operative time (almost one third). After an initial learning curve, set-up time was consistently maintained for most robotic procedures.

Conclusions:

The findings of this study have three implications for clinical practice. Firstly, console time contributed about half of the OR time. This can be optimised with experience. Secondly robot set-up time is likely to reduce with the experience of the whole team. Finally, non-operative OR time constitute a significant one third of the OR time during robotic surgery. Efforts to reduce non-surgical aspect of OR time will have potential to reduce cost and improve efficiency.

Level of Evidence:

4

"Robotic fatigue?" - The impact of case order on positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

PURPOSE

Multiple robotic-assisted surgeries are often performed within a single operating day; however, the impact of this practice on patient outcomes has not been examined. We aim to determine whether outcomes for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) differed when performed sequentially.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study was conducted involving a total of 8 academic centers between years 2015 and 2018. Participants were adult males undergoing RALP for localized prostate cancer on operative days in which 2 RALP cases were performed sequentially by the same resident-attending team. The primary outcome of the study was presence of positive surgical margin (PSM). Secondary outcomes were lymph node yield, operative time, and estimated blood loss. The primary analysis was a random effects meta-analysis model for PSM.

RESULTS

Overall, 898 RALP cases (449 sequential pairs) were included in the study. There was no significant difference in PSM rate (27.2% vs. 30.3%, P= 0.338) between first and second case groups, respectively. Utilizing random effects meta-analysis, the second case cohort had no increased risk of PSM (OR _0.761.23_1.97, P= 0.40). Higher blood loss was noted in the second case cohort (186.7 ml vs. 221.7 ml, P = 0.002). Additionally, factors associated with PSM were increasing prostate specific antigen, higher percent tumor involvement, extraprostatic extension, and seminal vesicle invasion.

CONCLUSION

Case sequence was not associated with PSM, lymph node yield, or operative time for RALP. Disease specific factors and institutional experience are associated with increased risk for positive surgical margin which can aid providers in scheduling of patients.