Single-Port versus Multi-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Comparative Study

Impact of transperitoneal anterior, retzius-sparing, extraperitoneal, transvesical and perineal approaches on urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence significantly impacts on health-related quality of life of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. In the last decades, several approaches (extraperitoneal, Retzius-sparing (RS), perineal and, transvesical) for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) have proposed with the aim to improve functional outcomes in comparison with transperitoneal, anterior ones.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published in English language, in the last ten years, comparing the different approaches used to perform RARP. We included only studies reporting urinary continence rates at different follow-up time points. From each eligible study, we extracted the number of analyzed patients; the study design; the continence definition; and, when available, immediate, 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-mo urinary continence rates. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom, UK). The Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using the generic inverse variance. A p value of <0.05 was set as significance level when comparing studies.

RESULTS

The meta-analyses of studies comparing anterior, transperitoneal RARP and RS-RARP in terms of immediate (OR = 3.73; 95% CI: 2.17-6.43; p < 0.0001), 1-mo (OR = 4.16; 95% CI: 2.68-6.48; p < 0.00001), 3-mo (OR 4.71; 95% CI: 3.70-6.00; p < 0.0001), 6-mo (OR 4.12; 95% CI: 2.95-5.75; p < 0.00001) and 12-mo (OR = 3.25; 95% CI: 1.76-5.99; p < 0.00001) urinary continence rates showed a statistically significant advantage in favor of RS approach. However, a sub-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials showed overlapping urinary continence rates between the two approaches at 6-mo (OR = 1.99; 95% CI: 0.90-4.42; p = 0.09) and 12-mo (OR = 1.36; 95% CI: 0.43-4.31; p = 0.60) after surgery. The meta-analysis of studies comparing extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches showed that 6-mo urinary continence rates were overlapping between the two approaches (OR = 1.18; 95% CI: 0.85-1.65; p = 0.32). The meta-analysis of studies comparing single-port (SP) and multi-port (MP) RARP showed comparable 6-mo urinary continence rates (OR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.65-1.33; p = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of mainly low to moderate quality of evidence, the RS  approach offers significant advantages compared to an anterior, transperitoneal, approach in terms of urinary continence recovery at different follow-up time points in patients who underwent MP-RARP. MP perineal and transvesical approaches need to be further tested and might be of interest in the setting of SP-RARP. Our meta-analysis showed comparable results between SP- and MP-RARP in terms of urinary continence rates.

Single-port robotic system - a paradigm shift in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy?

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become a cornerstone in the surgical management of prostate cancer. This study evaluates the potential of the Da Vinci single-port (SP) system, which represents a significant advancement in minimally invasive surgery.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases to identify relevant studies published between January 2018 and February 2025. Search terms included 'single-port robotic prostatectomy,' 'Da Vinci SP system,' and 'robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.' Studies comparing SP and multi-port (MP) systems were prioritized. The SP system is discussed in terms of its technical innovations, including 360° operative field visualization, integrated optics and instruments, and enhanced depth perception. Clinical benefits, such as reduced blood loss, faster recovery, improved cosmetic outcomes, and reduced surgical trauma, are highlighted. Comparisons are drawn between the SP and multi-port systems, focusing on oncological and functional outcomes, as well as the challenges associated with the SP system's steeper learning curve.

EXPERT OPINION

The SP system holds great promise in advancing patient care in RARP, particularly through its minimally invasive approach. While achieving comparable outcomes to MP systems, it uniquely reduces surgical trauma. However, successful implementation requires overcoming technical challenges and adapting to the learning curve. Future research should focus on refining the technology and exploring its long-term impact on clinical outcomes.

Recent Advances in Radical Prostatectomy: A Narrative Review of Surgical Innovations and Outcomes

Prostate cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies worldwide and is a major cause of cancer-associated morbidity in men. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is a cornerstone of intervention for organ-confined diseases and offers a potentially curative outcome. In recent decades, RP has undergone transformative changes, moving from open surgery, with significant morbidity, to minimally invasive and robot-assisted techniques. These advances have improved surgical precision, reduced blood loss, and accelerated functional recovery. Key enhancements, such as the "Veil of Aphrodite", hood-sparing, and Retzius-sparing approaches, aim to preserve neurovascular structures vital for continence and sexual function, addressing the persistent challenge of balancing oncological control with quality-of-life outcomes. Single-port (SP) robotic platforms represent the latest frontier, offering various access routes, including extraperitoneal, transvesical, transperitoneal, and transperineal routes, to further reduce incisional morbidity. Early experiences with SP robot-assisted radical prostatectomy(RARP) suggest favorable continence rates and short hospital stays, although concerns remain regarding the technical complexity and potential margin status of the advanced disease. Comparisons across these techniques revealed broadly similar long-term oncological outcomes, underscoring the importance of patient selection, tumor staging, and surgeon expertise. Ongoing innovations in robotic systems, augmented imaging modalities, and personalized surgical planning are likely to refine prostate cancer care and enhance both survival and post-treatment quality of life.

Single port robot-assisted radical and simple prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Aim of our study was to review the current evidence on single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and SP robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (SP-RASP) procedures.

METHODS

A comprehensive bibliographic search on multiple databases was conducted in July 2023. Studies were included if they assessed patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer or candidate for benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery (P) who underwent SP-RARP or SP-RASP, respectively, (I), compared or not with other surgical techniques (C), evaluating perioperative, oncological, or functional outcomes (O). Prospective and retrospective original articles were included (S). A meta-analysis of comparative studies between SP-RARP and MP-RARP was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies investigating 1400 patients were included in our systematic review, 18 were related to SP-RARP while 3 to SP-RASP. Only 8 comparative studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Mean follow-up was 8.1 (±5.8) months. Similar outcomes were observed for SP-RARP and MP-RARP in terms of operative time, catheterization time, pain score, complications rate, continence and potency rates, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the SP group after sensitivity analysis (WMD -0.58, 95% IC -1.17 to -0.9, p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis by extraperitoneal approach did not show any statistical difference, except for a lower positive margins rate in the SP extraperitoneal technique compared to MP-RARP. Overall, SP-RASP exhibited shorter hospital stay and lower rate of de novo urinary incontinence when compared to other techniques, while no differences were reported in terms of postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, post void residual and maximum flow.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall comparable oncological, functional, and perioperative outcomes can be achieved with SP platform. Subgroup analysis by different approaches did not reveal significant variations in outcomes. However, the retrospective nature of the studies, the limited follow-up, and the relatively small sample size of selected Centers may impact these results.

Single-Port vs Multiport Robotic Surgery in Urologic Oncology: A Narrative Review

Introduction: Robotic surgery has improved the oncologic and functional outcomes of many urologic oncology procedures by optimizing visualization and instrument maneuverability. Since its FDA approval in 2018, the daVinci single-port (SP) platform has become increasingly utilized in urologic oncology, with its theoretical advantages over the standard multiport (MP) platform including improved cosmesis, reduced pain, and shorter hospitalization. Given this platform's relative novelty, comparisons between SP and MP robotic surgeries in urologic oncology tend to be small, non-randomized studies performed at centers of excellence. We review the existing literature comparing oncologic and functional outcomes between SP and MP surgeries to treat prostate, kidney, and bladder cancer. Methods: A literature review was performed in PubMed for studies comparing SP and MP prostatectomies, nephrectomies, and cystectomies from 2018 to 2024. The search was limited to English studies. Studies evaluating prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy for nononcologic indications were excluded. Results: No difference in margin status or recurrence was definitively demonstrated between SP and MP radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy, or radical cystectomy. No clear difference in operative time, blood loss, or complication rates between SP and MP surgery was found. SP surgery may improve length of stay, pain, and satisfaction with incisions compared with MP surgery, though these differences were not robustly demonstrated across all studies. Key functional outcomes, such as change in kidney function in partial nephrectomy, and erectile/urinary function in radical prostatectomy, were similar between the SP and MP platforms. Conclusion: Based on current evidence from experienced surgeons at centers of excellence, the daVinci SP platform allows urologists to perform common oncologic procedures safely and effectively. Currently, no data definitively establishes improved oncologic or functional outcomes for SP surgery over MP surgery, though improved hospital stay and cosmesis are identified as theoretical benefits of an SP procedure.

Narrative Review of Single-Port Surgery in Genitourinary Cancers

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci single-port (SP) platform is emerging as the latest innovation in minimally invasive surgery and its utilization in treating urologic malignancies continues to expand.

METHODS

A search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect. The final set includes 40 academic articles.

RESULTS

Research on single-port surgery for genitourinary cancer is still an emerging topic. We divided the topic into the following categories: radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, nephrectomy, and nephroureterectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The single-port platform provides urologists with another tool to tackle more complex surgical cases and pathologies with the added improvements of decreased length of stay and increased pain tolerance for patients.

Robotic-assisted surgery for the treatment of urologic cancers: recent advances

INTRODUCTION

Recent advancements in single-port surgery, robotic platforms, 3D models and artificial intelligence have transformed surgical procedures, especially in urology. These innovations enhance precision, safety, and efficacy, reducing invasiveness and recovery times. The review focuses on the latest in robotic-assisted surgery for genitourinary cancers, highlighting the shift toward personalized, minimally invasive treatments.

AREAS COVERED

A bibliographic search across PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases focused on the last four years of innovations in robotic surgery for urologic tumors. The review highlights the use of the Da Vinci Single Port robotic system, available robotic platforms worldwide, advancements in 3D virtual models, artificial intelligence in robotic surgery and the application of molecular imaging for assessing primary lymph nodes and treating lymph node metastases and local recurrences in prostate cancer.

EXPERT OPINION

The integration of single-port surgery, new robotic platforms, 3D models and artificial intelligence in urological oncology promises transformative impacts on diagnosis, treatment and cost-effectiveness. Despite benefits like enhanced precision and expanded surgical access, challenges such as high costs, training needs, and technological integration barriers persist. Collaboration and further research are critical to optimize outcomes, improve safety protocols, and ensure equitable global access to these innovations.

Extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Short-term outcomes and technique description

PURPOSE

We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and introduced innovative surgical techniques to maintain the instrument positions during the procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 100 patients underwent extraperitoneal SP-RARP at our institution from December 2021 to April 2023. The procedures were performed by an experienced urology surgeon utilizing two surgical techniques for dissecting the posterior aspect of the prostate-"changing instrument roles" and "using camera inversion"-to prevent positional shifts between the camera and instruments.

RESULTS

The mean operation time for SP-RARP was 93.58 minutes, and the mean console time was 65.16 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss during the procedures was 109.30 mL. No cases necessitated conversion to multi-port robot, laparoscopy, or open surgery, and there were no major complications during the hospital stay or in the short-term follow-up. Early outcomes of post-radical prostatectomy indicated a biochemical recurrence rate of 4.0% over a mean follow-up duration of 6.40 months, with continence and potency recovery rates of 92.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Analysis of the learning curve showed no significant differences in operation time, console time, and positive surgical margin rates between the initial and latter 50 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Extraperitoneal SP-RARP is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in skilled hands. Continued accrual of cases is essential for future comparisons of SP-RARP with multiport approaches.

Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Comparison Among Extraperitoneal Single-port and Transperitoneal Multiport Radical Prostatectomy-A Single-center Experience

Background and objective

The role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) for prostate cancer is still controversial. This study aims to compare the outcomes of PLND between extraperitoneal single-port (SP eRARP) and transperitoneal multiport (MP tRARP) robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis from our single-center database for patients who underwent SP eRARP or MP tRARP with PLND between 2015 and 2023. The primary endpoint was to analyze and compare specific data related to PLND between the two populations by the detection of pN+ patients, the total number of lymph nodes removed, and the number of positive lymph nodes removed. The secondary endpoints included comparing major complications, lymphoceles, and biochemical recurrence between the two cohorts of the study.

Key findings and limitations

A total of 293 patients were included, with 85 (29%) undergoing SP eRARP and 208 (71%) undergoing MP tRARP. SP eRARP showed significant differences in PLND extension from MP tRARP, while MP tRARP yielded more lymph nodes (p < 0.001). There were no differences in pN+ patient detection (p = 0.7) or the number of positive lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.6). The rates of major complications (p = 0.6), lymphoceles (p = 0.2), and biochemical recurrence (p = 0.9) were similar between the two groups. Additionally, SP eRARP had shorter operative time (p = 0.045), hospital stay (p < 0.001), and less postoperative pain at discharge (p = 0.03). Limitations include a retrospective, single-center analysis.

Conclusions and clinical implications

Despite the SP approach in RARP resulting in fewer retrieved lymph nodes, outcomes were comparable with the MP approach regarding the detection of patients with positive lymph nodes and the number of positive nodes. Additionally, the SP approach led to lower pain levels and shorter hospital stays.

Patient summary

With this study, we demonstrate that pelvic lymph node dissection performed via the extraperitoneal approach during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with a single-port system provides comparable outcomes with the standard transperitoneal multiport approach in detecting patients with positive lymph nodes and retrieving positive nodes. In addition, it offers significantly reduced pain levels and shorter hospital stays.

Single Port Radical Prostatectomy as a Viable Option for Highly Complex Patients: A Single Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

To explore the safety and feasibility of the Da Vinci single-port (SP) platform in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP), aiming to provide a viable option for patients with surgical and medical complexities that might otherwise limit their access to common minimally invasive technique.

METHODS

Data from 60 medically and surgically highly complex patients undergoing SP-RARP between December 2018 and December 2023 were analyzed. Variables included patient characteristics, surgical history, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 17.0.

RESULTS

Fifty-three percent of cases had a hostile abdomen (HA) (≥1 major abdominal surgery), and 47% were medically highly complex (American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥5, and a body mass index ≥30). The extraperitoneal approach was used in 56% of HA cases and 68% of MHC cases. Intraoperative complications occurred in 12%, exclusively with the transperitoneal approach in HA cases. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) were 6% and 14%, respectively, with no significant difference between approaches. Same-day discharge was possible in 44% of HA cases and 54% of MHC cases, with significant statistical differences favoring the extraperitoneal approach in both groups.

CONCLUSION

SP-RARP, particularly the extraperitoneal approach, is a viable option for highly complex and challenging cases, providing acceptable oncological and functional outcomes. Prospective studies are crucial for further validating the safety and feasibility of SP-RARP in this patient population.

Single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

To provide a comprehensive update on the different techniques and outcomes of contemporary Single-Port (SP) Robotic Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) approaches.

METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify cohort studies that have utilized the purpose-built SP robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, California) for RARP. All published approaches of SP-RARP were included in our review. Baseline clinical, perioperative, and postoperative oncological and functional outcomes were collected from the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies involving 1159 patients were identified. To date, five approaches of SP-RARP have been described, namely Transperitoneal, Extraperitoneal, Retzius-Sparing, Transperineal, and Transvesical. The surgical steps and clinical outcomes of the aforementioned approaches were discussed. While operating times were still faster in the Transperitoneal and Extraperitoneal cohorts, the novel and more regionalized Transvesical approach allowed for radical prostatectomy to be pursued in more patients with previous abdominal surgeries and contributed to significantly improved postoperative outcomes, including the earlier return of urinary continence and with most patients being discharged on the same day without any opioids.

CONCLUSION

Based on the existing literature, the introduction of SP-RARP not only enriched the repertoire of minimally-invasive surgical treatment options for prostate cancer but also provided the opportunity for urologists to develop new techniques that can improve perioperative outcomes and postoperative quality of life. Given the limited number of patients and heterogeneity in the patient selection and reporting of postoperative outcomes, further research remains necessary to better understand the different benefits and improve patient selection algorithms for the different techniques.

Comparing the safety and efficacy of single-port versus multi-port robotic-assisted techniques in urological surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Comparing the safety and efficacy of single-port (SP) versus multi-port (MP) robotic-assisted techniques in urological surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA criteria for primary outcomes of interest, and quality assessment followed AMSTAR. Four databases were systematically searched: Embase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The search time range is from database creation to December 2022. Stata16 was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

There were 17 studies involving 5015 patients. In urological surgeries, single-port robotics had shorter length of stay (WMD = - 0.63, 95% Cl [- 1.06, - 0.21], P < 0.05), less estimated blood loss (WMD = - 19.56, 95% Cl [- 32.21, - 6.91], P < 0.05), less lymph node yields (WMD = - 3.35, 95% Cl [- 5.16, - 1.55], P < 0.05), less postoperative opioid use (WMD = - 5.86, 95% Cl [- 8.83, - 2.88], P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time, positive margins rate, overall complications rate, and major complications rate.

CONCLUSION

Single-port robotics appears to have similar perioperative outcomes to multi-port robotics in urological surgery. In radical prostatectomy, single-port robotics has shown some advantages, but the specific suitability of single-port robots for urological surgical types needs to be further explored.

Early outcomes of single-site versus multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-site robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (ssRARP) has been promoted in many institutions due to its minimally invasive approach. This review aimed to investigate early outcomes of ssRARP in comparison with multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (mpRARP).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for articles related to ssRARP case series and studies that compared ssRARP with mpRARP. The primary outcomes were functional and oncological outcomes, incision length, length of hospital stay and cost.

RESULTS

24 ssRARP case series involving 1385 cases, and 11 comparative studies involving 573 ssRARP cases and 980 mpRARP cases were included. Rate of immediate, 3-month, 6-month and 12-month recovery of continence in the ssRARP case series were 41 % [95 % CI: 0.38-0.45], 70 % [95 % CI: 0.67-0.73], 90 % [95 % CI: 0.87-0.93] and 93 % [95 % CI: 0.90-0.96]. 3-month potency recovery and positive surgical margin rate were 53 % [95 % CI: 0.46-0.60] and 21 % [95 % CI: 0.19-0.24]. No significant differences were detected between ssRARP and mpRARP in terms of 3-month (OR: 1.12; 95 % CI: 0.80-1.57) or 6-month (OR: 0.72; 95 % CI: 0.36-1.46) continence recovery rate, 3-month potency recovery rate (OR: 0.92; 95 % CI: 0.50-1.70), positive surgical margin rate (OR: 0.83; 95 % CI: 0.62-1.11), biochemical recurrence rate or total cost. Furthermore, ssRARP was associated with a significantly shorter length of incision and hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

ssRARP has significant advantages in cosmetic effect, length of incision and rapid recovery. Consequently, ssRARP is expected to become the preferred form although more evidence is needed to determine its long-term effect.

Single-port and multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis

Objective

To compare the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes between single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (MP-RARP) via a meta-analysis.

Methods

For relevant articles, three electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception until January 15, 2022. A meta-analysis has been reported in line with PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR Guidelines. The risk ratio and weighted mean difference (MD) were applied for the comparison of dichotomous and continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Of the 368 retrieved abstracts, 41 underwent full-text review, and seven studies were included in the final analysis, comprising a total cohort of 1,934 cases of RARP (355 SP-RARP cases and 1,579 MP-RARP cases). Compared to MP-RARP, the SP-RARP group had less postoperative pain score (MD = -0.7, 95% CI -1 to -0.4, P<0.001), morphine milligram equivalents usage (MD = -3.8, 95% CI -7.5 to -0.1, P=0.04), hospital stay (MD = -1, 95% CI -1.8 to -0.1, P=0.019), and urinary catheterization time (MD = -1.1, 95% CI -1.9 to -0.3, P=0.008). However, the SP-RARP group had a longer console time than the MP-RARP group (MD = 5.3, 95% CI 2.6 to 7.9, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that early results were mostly equivalent with the single-port approach. This technology may help to reduce the hospital stay and postoperative pain for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy compared to MP-RARP, without compromising the functional and early oncological outcomes.

Perioperative results of single-port vs multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy via peritoneal approach: a meta-analysis

To compare the perioperative outcomes of single-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and multiport robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (MP-RARP) via transperitoneal approach, we conducted a comprehensive database search of eligible studies up to October 2022 and compared their results. This study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed to control for heterogeneity and risk of bias. A total of six articles were included, involving 926 patients, among which 256 underwent SP-RARP and 670 underwent MP-RARP. Comparing the two, SP-RARP was associated with shorter hospitalization time (- 0.5 days; 95% CI - 1.02, - 0.06, p < 0.05) and less intraoperative blood loss (- 29.88 ml; 95% CI - 45.66, - 14.10, p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in any complications, operative time, positive surgical margins, or short-term follow-up outcomes (continence and potency at 3 months). These findings provide reference data for the selection of surgical methods in performing transperitoneal RP and support further research on the broad applicability of the SP platform.

Single-Port Robotic Applications in Urology

Objective: The da Vinci single-port (SP) platform represents the latest innovation in minimally invasive urologic surgery, and the adoption of this technology by urologists is increasing. In this article, we briefly describe the evolution of minimally invasive and single-site surgery, and offer a comprehensive review of the current literature on the SP platform. Materials and Methods: For relevant articles, three electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception until August 15, 2022. The published literature to date within SP robotic surgery in urology will be discussed. Evidence Synthesis: There are relatively few high-quality studies on the SP system, but there are multiple case series describing unique indications and surgical approaches with the SP robot, demonstrating safety and feasibility in the hands of experienced robotic surgeons. There also are an increasing number of prospective, larger cohort studies comparing outcomes between SP and multiport (MP) approaches that show benefits of the SP system regarding improved cosmesis, postoperative pain control, and decreased length of stay. Conclusions: Multiple prospective studies have shown benefits regarding cost and pain control for SP platform procedures compared to the traditional MP robotic approach. While its high cost and learning curve represent barriers to adoption, the SP platform represents a critical development in minimally invasive surgery. As this technology is further implemented at more institutions, long-term, high-quality data should accrue that will demonstrate its true value.