Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot

Robot-assisted Surgery in the Field of Urology: The Most Pioneering Approaches 2015-2023

Robot-assisted surgery has emerged as a transformative technology, revolutionizing surgical approaches and techniques that decades ago could barely be imagined. The field of urology has taken charge in pioneering a new era of minimally invasive surgery with the ascent of robotic systems which offer enhanced visualization, precision, dexterity, and enabling surgeons to perform intricate maneuvers with improved accuracy. This has led to improved surgical outcomes, including reduced blood loss, lower complication rates, and faster patient recovery. The aim of our review is to present an evidence-based critical analysis on the most pioneering robotic urologic approaches described over the last eight years (2015-2023).

Transition from standard robotic prostatectomy to Retzius-sparing prostatectomy: feasibility and early outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (rsRARP) has gained popularity due to superior early continence outcomes compared to standard robotic prostatectomy (sRARP). We evaluate the results of a single surgeon who transitioned from sRARP to rsRARP and compare oncologic and functional outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all prostatectomies performed by a single surgeon between June 2018 and October 2020. Perioperative, oncologic, and functional data were collected and analyzed. Patients who underwent sRARP were compared with those who underwent rsRARP.

RESULTS

Both groups contained 37 consecutive patients each. Preoperative patient characteristics and biopsy results were similar between the two groups. Perioperative outcomes were significant for longer operative room time and higher proportion of T3 tumors in the rsRARP group. Thirty-day complication and readmission rates were similar between groups. There was no difference in early oncologic outcomes, including positive surgical margin rate, biochemical recurrence, and need for adjuvant or salvage treatments. The time to urinary continence and immediate continence rate was superior in the rsRARP group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Retzius-sparing approach can be safely adopted by surgeons experienced in sRARP without compromising early oncologic outcomes and with the benefit of improved early continence recovery.

Optimizing Nerve Sparing in Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Investigation of Traditional and Modified Endopelvic Fascia Preservation Techniques

Background

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer and the sixth leading cause of cancer-related mortality in men. In 2000, Abbou performed the first robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, and radical prostatectomy has developed rapidly. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a valuable therapeutic option for the management of localized Pca.

Objective

To present the functional outcome of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using traditional and modified endopelvic fascia preservation methods in a single center in Vietnam.

Methods

We prospectively analyzed a series of 65 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer from 2020 to 2023. All of those were operated by DaVinci Si system robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Twenties patients were applied with a modified nerve-sparing technique, intrafascial dissection, and lateral prostatic fascia preservation, leaving the lateral tissue, including the neurovascular bundle, untouched and covered. We used the traditional approach, intrafascial nerve-sparing with open endopelvic fascia and lateral prostatic fascia in 45 cases. Patients were followed up to 12 months to assess the continence and erectile function by using IIEF-5 and EPIC questionnaires.

Results

The study sample included 65 cases; the mean patient age was 64.21 ± 6.68, erection rate after surgery at six months in bilateral NS was 36.58% (15/41) in the traditional group, and 68.42% (13/19) in the modified group (p=0.028). The patient did not recover erectile ability in the group of elderly patients (>65 years old) and unilateral nerve-sparing group. The continence rate six months after surgery was 86.66 % in the conventional group and 85% in the modified group, with no significant difference between the two groups. In the potency group, the IIEF-5 score was 13 ± 4.9, and the EPIC-26 score was 62.20 ± 10.04. Erectile ability in the modified group was better than the traditional group at six months after surgery.

Conclusion

Our results showed better potency recovery in the modified group. These results should be tested in future research with randomized studies.

Single-Port versus Multiple-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Single-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has been reported as a safe and feasible technique. However, recent studies comparing single-port versus multiple-port robotic radical prostatectomy have displayed conflicting results. Objectives: To investigate the benefit of single-port robotic radical prostatectomy and the impact on outcome compared to multiple-port robotic radical prostatectomy. Methods: Based on PRISMA and AMSTAR criteria, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. Finally, we considered the controlled studies with two cohorts (one cohort for single-port RARP and the other cohort for multiple-port RARP). For statistical analysis, Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.4 was used. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to assess the risk of bias. Results: Five non-randomized controlled studies with 666 patients were included. Single-port robotic radical prostatectomy was associated with shorter hospital stays. Only 60.6% of single-port patients (109/180) required analgesia compared to 90% (224/249) of multiple-port patients (Z = 3.50; p = 0.0005; 95% CI 0.07:0.47). Opioid administration was also significantly lower in single-port patients, 26.2% (34/130) vs. 56.6% (77/136) (Z = 4.90; p < 0.00001; 95% CI 0.15:–0.44) There was no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, complication rate, positive surgical margin rate, or continence at day 90. Conclusion: The available data on single-port robotic radical prostatectomy is very limited. However, it seems comparable to the multiple-port platform in terms of short-term outcomes when performed with expert surgeons. Single-port prostatectomies might provide a shorter hospital stay and a lower requirement for opioids; however, randomized trials with long-term follow-up are mandatory for valid comparisons.

Transition from open to robotically assisted approach on radical prostatectomies in Iceland. A nationwide, population-based study

OBJECTIVES

In January 2015, radical prostatectomies (RPs) in Iceland changed almost entirely from being performed as open (ORP) to robotically assisted (RARP). This study assesses early surgical and short-term oncological outcome after ORP and RARP and evaluates the safety of transition between the two surgical techniques.

METHODS

The study population involved 160/163 (98%) of all radical prostatectomies performed in Iceland between January 2013 and April 2016. Data on patients was collected retrospectively from medical records. Early surgical and short-term oncological outcomes were compared between the two surgical techniques.

RESULTS

The ORP and RARP cohorts were comparable with respect to all clinical and pathological variables, except for median prostate volume, which was 45 mL in the ORP cohort and 37 mL in the RARP cohort (p = 0.03). Intraoperative blood loss was higher, hospital stay longer, catheterization time longer, and risk of complications within 30 days of surgery higher after ORP than RARP (p < 0.01). The operative time, positive surgical margin rate and recurrence free survival, within two years, was comparable between the two surgical techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The transition from ORP to RARP in Iceland was safe and resulted in improved early surgical outcome. However, no conclusion can be drawn from this study regarding oncological outcome, due to short follow up and a small sample size.

Comparison of Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy vs. Conventional Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis

Background: The Retzius space-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) has shown better results in urinary continence, but its efficacy and safety compared to conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (c-RARP) remain controversial.

Material and Methods: A research was conducted in Medline via PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to January 4, 2021, to identify studies comparing RS-RARP to c-RARP. We used RevMan 5.3 and STATA 14.0 for meta-analysis.

Results: A total of 14 studies involving 3,129 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in positive surgical margins (PSMs), but the RS-RARP group had significantly higher PSM rates in the anterior site [odds ratio (OR) = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.22–4.16, P = 0.01]. Postoperative continence in RS-RARP group at 1 month (OR = 5.72, 95% CI: 3.56–9.19, P < 0.01), 3 months (OR = 6.44, 95% CI: 4.50–9.22, P < 0.01), 6 months (OR = 8.68, 95% CI: 4.01–18.82, P < 0.01), and 12 months (OR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.20–4.70, P = 0.01) was significantly better than that in the c-RARP group. In addition, the RS-RARP group had a shorter console time (mean difference = −16.28, 95% CI: −27.04 to −5.53, P = 0.003) and a lower incidence of hernia (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.19–0.67, P = 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, pelvic lymph node dissection rate, postoperative complications, 1-year-biochemical recurrence rate, and postoperative sexual function.

Conclusions: Compared with c-RARP, RS-RARP showed better recovery of continence, shorter console time, and lower incidence of hernia. Although there was no significant difference in overall PSM, we suggest that the surgeon should be more careful if the lesion is in the anterior prostate.

Radical Prostatectomy: Sequelae in the Course of Time

Objective: Radical prostatectomy (RP) is a frequent treatment for men suffering from localized prostate cancer (PCa). Whilst offering a high chance for cure, it does not come without a significant impact on health-related quality of life. Herein we review the common adverse effects RP may have over the course of time. Methods: A collaborative narrative review was performed with the identification of the principal studies on the topic. The search was executed by a relevant term search on PubMed from 2010 to February 2021. Results: Rates of major complications in patients undergoing RP are generally low. The main adverse effects are erectile dysfunction varying from 11 to 87% and urinary incontinence varying from 0 to 87% with a peak in functional decline shortly after surgery, and dependent on definitions. Different less frequent side effects also need to be taken into account. The highest rate of recovery is seen within the first year after RP, but even long-term improvements are possible. Nevertheless, for some men these adverse effects are long lasting and different, less frequent side effects also need to be taken into account. Despite many technical advances over the last two decades no surgical approach can be clearly favored when looking at long-term outcome, as surgical volume and experience as well as individual patient characteristics are still the most influential variables. Conclusions: The frequency of erectile function and urinary continence side effects after RP, and the trajectory of recovery, need to be taken into account when counseling patients about their treatment options for prostate cancer.

Preoperative exercise interventions to optimize continence outcomes following radical prostatectomy

Urinary incontinence is a common and predictable consequence among men with localized prostate cancer who have undergone radical prostatectomy. Despite advances in the surgical technique, urinary continence recovery time remains variable. A range of surgical and patient-related risk factors contributing to urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy have been described, including age, BMI, membranous urethral length and urethral sphincter insufficiency. Physical activity interventions incorporating aerobic exercise, resistance training and pelvic floor muscle training programmes can positively influence the return to continence in men after radical prostatectomy. Traditional approaches to improving urinary continence after radical prostatectomy have typically focused on interventions delivered during the postoperative period (rehabilitation). However, the limited efficacy of these postoperative approaches has led to a shift from the traditional reactive model of care to more comprehensive interventions incorporating exercise-based programmes that begin in the preoperative period (prehabilitation) and continue after surgery. Comprehensive prehabilitation interventions include appropriately prescribed aerobic exercise, resistance training and specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and exercise training programmes. Transperineal ultrasonography is a non-invasive and validated method for the visualization of the action of the pelvic floor musculature, providing real-time visual biofeedback to the patient during specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and training. Importantly, the waiting time before surgery can be used for the delivery of comprehensive prehabilitation exercise-based interventions to increase patient preparedness in the lead-up to surgery and optimize continence and health-related quality-of-life outcomes following radical prostatectomy.

Diffusion and adoption of the surgical robot in urology

Over the last two decades, robotic surgery has become a mainstay in hospital systems around the world. Leading this charge has been Intuitive Surgical Inc.’s da Vinci robotic system (Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Through its innovative technology and unique revenue model, Intuitive has installed 4,986 robotic surgical systems worldwide in the last two decades. The rapid rate of adoption and diffusion of the surgical robot has been propelled by many important industry-specific factors. In this review, we propose a model that explains the successful adoption of robotic surgery due to its three core groups: the surgeon, the hospital administrator, and the patient.

Locally operated assistant manipulators with selectable connection system for robotically assisted laparoscopic solo surgery

PURPOSE

By integrating locally operated surgical assistant robots in a sterilized area, a surgeon can perform safe robotically assisted laparoscopic solo surgery while controlling a laparoscope-holding robot and a forceps robot. At present, there is no leader-follower control system with switchable connection for the leader device in which each assistant follower robot can provide the manipulation intuitively and easily. In the present study, a new locally operated leader-follower selectable control system has been developed.

METHODS

The leader-follower system was developed to connect one leader operating device and one of two selectable follower assistant manipulator devices with different numbers of axes, kinematics models, sensors, and actuators for view stabilization and pulling organs. The system is constructed using the middleware of the ORiN-based medical robot architecture MRLink. The system is regulated by the robot integrator application with unilateral leader-follower PTP using the relative displacement between the leader device and the selected follower device through providers of device interface including the information and control commands.

RESULTS

The execution cycle for updating the position was 50 ms, and the time delay to catch up with the same position was 100 ms. Two assistant manipulators controlled by the leader-follower selectable system could successfully produce the desired view and handle the target organ model for 17 min in a simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

A locally operated leader-follower selectable control system was constructed to facilitate minimally invasive, robotically assisted laparoscopic solo surgery by a doctor working near the patient. This system could be used for such applications.

Robotic surgical systems in urology: What is currently available?

Robotic assistance in laparoscopic surgery was introduced at the turn of this millennium, marking a milestone in the history of surgery. Urologists were early adopters of robotic technology and the indications of robot-assisted surgery in urology are expanding. Over the last 20 years, the da Vinci surgical system was the dominant system in the robotic surgical market. However, the recent expiration of Intuitive patents has allowed new systems to enter the market more freely. We performed a nonsystematic literature review using the PubMed/MEDLINE search engines. The aim of this review was to briefly summarize the currently available robotic surgical systems for laparoscopic urologic surgery. New surgical devices have already been launched in the robotic market and the da Vinci systems have some competition. The innovation of robotic technology is continuing, and new features such as an open-console design, haptic feedback, smaller instruments, and separately mounted robotic arms have been introduced. A new robotic era is rising, and new systems and technologies enhancing patient care are welcomed.

Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional comparative study

Background

The standard surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa) has been rapidly changed along the last two decades from open to laparoscopic and finally robot-assisted techniques. Herein, we compare the three procedures for radical prostatectomy (RP), namely radical retropubic (RRP), laparoscopic (LRP), and robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALRP) regarding the perioperative clinical outcome and complication rate in four academic institutions.

Methods

A total of 394 patients underwent RP between January 2016 and December 2018 in four academic institutions; their records were reviewed. We recorded the patient age, BMI, PSA level, Gleason score and TNM stage, type of surgery, the pathological data from the surgical specimen, the perioperative complications, unplanned reoperating, and readmission rates within 3 months postoperatively. Statistical significance was set at (P < 0.05). All reported P values are two-sided.

Results

A total of 123 patients underwent RALRP, 220 patients underwent RRP, and 51 underwent LRP. There was no statistically significant difference between the three groups regarding age, BMI, prostatic volume, and preoperative PSA. However, there were statistically significant differences between them regarding the operating time (P < .0001), catheterization period (P < .001), hospital stay (P < .0001), and overall complications rate (P = .023).

Conclusions

The minimally invasive procedures (RALRP and LRP) are followed by a significantly lower complication rate. However, the patients’ factors and surgical experience likely impact perioperative outcomes and complications.

Intraoperative ultrasound: technique and clinical experience in robotic-assisted renal partial nephrectomy for endophytic renal tumors

OBJECTIVES

Surgical removal of completely endophytic renal tumors has presented great technical difficulties for surgeons. In this study, we aim to introduce the role and use of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) performed in robotic-assisted renal partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for endophytic renal tumors.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the demographics data and surgical outcomes of 58 consecutive endophytic renal tumor patients who were all attributed 3 points for the 'E' domain of the RENAL nephrometry score or 3 points for the exophytic rate of the PADUA score between October 2016 and September 2018. 38 patients who had undergone RAPN with IOUS were grouped. RAPN was carried out in another 20 patients without IOUS and these 20 patients were also grouped.

RESULTS

Patients in IOUS-guided group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (P = 0.010) and improved MIC (Margin, ischemia, and complications) rate (P = 0.026) and Pentafecta achievement (P = 0.016) compared to non IOUS-guided group. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, RAPN with IOUS was an independent predictor of MIC achievement (odds ratio 3.595; confidence interval 1.023-12.633; P = 0.046). Surface-intermediate-base (SIB) margin score was lower for IOUS-guided group vs non IOUS-guided group (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

RAPN for completely endophytic renal tumors is a feasible procedure in terms of complication rates, oncologic and functional outcomes. A robotic ultrasound probe operated by console surgeon generates a favorable perioperative outcomes and surgical margin rates after RAPN.

The Silent Operation Theatre Optimisation System (SOTOS©) to reduce noise pollution during da Vinci robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

To reduce noise pollution and consequently stress during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) the aim of our study was to evaluate the silent operation theatre optimisation system (SOTOS) in its effectiveness. In the operating room (OR) the noise level is between 80 and 85 decibel (dB). Noise corresponds to a major stress factor for surgical teams and especially surgeons. The use of the da Vinci surgical system entails an additional aspect of noise in the OR. The SOTOS surgical team used wired or wireless headphone/microphone combinations to communicate. We measured sound pressure levels in two different locations in the OR and the heart rate of every surgical team member as an indicator of the stress level. We further captured subjective acceptance of SOTOS as well as perioperative data such as surgical time. We prospectively randomised 32 RALP patients into two study arms. Sixteen surgeries were performed using SOTOS and 16 without (control). Overall, the mean sound pressure level in the SOTOS group was 3.6 dB lower compared to the control (p < 0.001). The highest sound pressure level measured was 96 dB in the control group. Mean heart rates were 81.3 beats/min for surgeons and 90.8 beats/min for circulating nurses. SOTOS had no statistically significant effect on mean heart rates of the operating team. Subjective acceptance of SOTO was high. Our prospective evaluation of SOTOS in RALP could show a significant noise reduction in the OR and a high acceptance by the surgical stuff.

Techniques of robotic radical prostatectomy for the management of prostate cancer: which one, when and why

The advent of robotic assistance in surgery has completely revolutionized the surgical management of prostate cancer. It enables precise dissection and reconstruction in order to maximize oncological and functional outcomes. In many parts of the world, robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has evolved to become the surgical standard of care for localized disease, including in appropriately selected patients with high risk prostate cancer. Its role has also been expanded to encompass cytoreductive prostatectomy and salvage radical prostatectomy. As surgical expertise grows with robotic assistance, several novel and non-radical approaches have been developed to further mitigate treatment side effects. Patient characteristics, disease factors and surgeon expertise are important metrics for consideration when selecting the most appropriate technique for any given patient.

Considering the role of radical prostatectomy in 21st century prostate cancer care

The practice of radical prostatectomy for treating prostate cancer has evolved remarkably since its general introduction around 1900. Initially described using a perineal approach, the procedure was later popularized using a retropubic one, after it was first described as such in 1948. The open surgical method has now largely been abandoned in favour of the minimally invasive robot-assisted method, which was first described in 2000. Until 1980, the procedure was hazardous, often accompanied by massive blood loss and poor outcomes. For patients in whom surgery is indicated, prostatectomy is increasingly being used as the first step in a multitherapeutic approach in advanced local, and even early metastatic, disease. However, contemporary molecular insights have enabled many men to safely avoid surgical intervention when the disease is phenotypically indolent and use of active surveillance programmes continues to expand worldwide. In 2020, surgery is not recommended in those men with low-grade, low-volume Gleason 6 prostate cancer; previously these men - a large cohort of ~40% of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer - were offered surgery in large numbers, with little clinical benefit and considerable adverse effects. Radical prostatectomy is appropriate for men with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease (Gleason score 7-9 or Grade Groups 2-5) in whom radical prostatectomy prevents further metastatic seeding of potentially lethal clones of prostate cancer cells. Small series have suggested that it might be appropriate to offer radical prostatectomy to men presenting with small metastatic burden (nodal and or bone) as part of a multimodal therapeutic approach. Furthermore, surgical treatment of prostate cancer has been reported in cohorts of octogenarian men in good health with minimal comorbidities, when 20 years ago such men were rarely treated surgically even when diagnosed with localized high-risk disease. As medical therapies for prostate cancer continue to increase, the use of surgery might seem to be less relevant; however, the changing demographics of prostate cancer means that radical prostatectomy remains an important and useful option in many men, with a changing indication.

The 100 most influential manuscripts in robotic surgery: a bibliometric analysis

Since the first robotic assisted surgery in 1985, the number of procedures performed annually has steadily increased. Bibliometric analysis highlights the key studies that have influenced current practice in a field of interest. We use bibliometric analysis to evaluate the 100 most cited manuscripts on robotic surgery and discuss their content and influence on the evolution of the platform. The terms 'robotic surgery,' 'robot assisted surgery' and 'robot-assisted surgery' were used to search Thomson Reuters Web of Science database for full length, English language manuscripts. The top 100 cited manuscripts were analyzed by manuscript type, surgical specialty, first and last author, institution, year and journal of publication. 14,980 manuscripts were returned. Within the top 100 cited manuscripts, the majority featured urological surgery (n = 28), followed by combined results from multiple surgical subspecialties (n = 15) and colorectal surgery (n = 13). The majority of manuscripts featured case series/reports (n = 42), followed by comparative studies (n = 24). The most cited paper authored by Nelson et al. (432 citations) reviewed technological advances in the field. The year and country with the greatest number of publications were 2009 (n = 15) and the USA (n = 68). The Johns Hopkins University published the most top 100 manuscripts (n = 18). The 100 most cited manuscripts reflect the progression of robotic surgery from a basic instrument-holding platform to today's articulated instruments with 3D technology. From feasibility studies to multicenter trials, this analysis demonstrates how robotic assisted surgery has gained acceptance in urological, colorectal, general, cardiothoracic, orthopedic, maxillofacial and neuro surgery.

Outcomes and Complications of Simultaneous Laparoscopic Cystectomy and Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy with Umbilical Reduced Port Surgery

Objective:

In recent years, although reduced port surgeries (RPS) have been reported for many urological diseases, there have been no reports regarding simultaneous laparoscopic cystectomy and unilateral or bilateral nephroureterectomy with umbilical RPS. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes and complications of simultaneous laparoscopic cystectomy and unilateral or bilateral nephroureterectomy with umbilical RPS.

Methods:

We performed a preliminary case series of 4 patients with synchronous upper urinary tract (UUT) tumor and invasive bladder cancer who underwent simultaneous laparoscopic cystectomy and unilateral or bilateral nephroureterectomy with umbilical RPS between 2014 and 2017 at our hospital. Demographic data, pathologic features, the surgical technique, and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

Result:

All 4 patients were men whose median age was 79 years (range 65-85 years) and median body mass index was 24.2 kg/m² (range 21.5-27.3 kg/m²). The laparoscopic approach was technically successful in all 4 patients without the need for open conversion. The median total operative time was 434 minutes (range 372-481 minutes). The median estimated blood loss was 773 ml (range 153-923 ml), median interval to resuming oral intake was 2 days (range 1-7 days), and median hospital stay was 16 days (range 13-20 days).

Conclusion:

The reduced port approach is technically feasible in terms of many outcome measures, with significant cosmetic advantages. This method can be performed safely and recommended as a viable option for patients with concomitant UUT and bladder cancer.

Open and robotic radical prostatectomy

Open retropubic radical prostatectomy has been the "gold standard" treatment for locally confined prostate cancer (PCa) but in recent years minimal invasive techniques as laparoscopy and robot-assisted prostatectomy have become widely available. The trifecta of the surgical treatment of PCa is cancer control, the preservation of continence, and erectile potency. Over the years the complication rates of radical prostatectomy have become very limited with improved cancer control and better functional results. We review the indications and the surgical technique of radical prostatectomy, be it open or laparoscopic, eventually robot-assisted as well as the pre- and postoperative measures and the surgery-related consequences.

Collaborating with our adult colleagues: A case series of robotic surgery for suspicious and cancerous lesions in children and young adults performed in a free-standing children's hospital

BACKGROUND

In adult urologic oncology the use of robotics has become commonplace; in pediatric urology it is rare. Herein, we describe a collaboration between an adult and a pediatric urologist performing robotic surgery for children and young adults with suspicious or cancerous genitourinary (GU) lesions.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical and oncologic outcomes in children and young adults undergoing robotic surgery for suspicious or cancerous lesions of the GU tract; to describe our collaborative model between an adult and pediatric surgeon at a free-standing children's hospital.

DESIGN

We retrospectively reviewed all robotic cases performed at our institution from 2014 to 2016 for patients with a GU malignancy or a suspicious mass. The surgeries were performed by a pediatric urologist with robotic experience and a fellowship-trained MIS adult urologist specializing in oncology. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of eight robotic cases were performed: four partial nephrectomies (PN) with retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (LND) (OT 269-338 min, EBL 5-300 mL, LOS 3-6 days), one adrenalectomy with LND (6.4 cm mass; OT 172 min, EBL 5 mL, LOS 3 days), one nephrectomy with pericaval LND (9.8 cm mass; 234 min, EBL 25 mL, LOS 3 days), and two retroperitoneal LNDs (OT 572 and 508 min, EBL 250 and 100, LOS 3 and 4 days). Patient weights ranged from 14 to 79 kg (mean 53.4 kg). There were no major complications (Clavien 3-5). Pathology results for PN included papillary RCC (AJCC pT1aNx) and two cases of segmental cystic renal dysplasia with nephrogenic rests. Bilateral template RPLNDs yielded paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma (43 nodes; COG low risk group II stage I) and mixed non-seminomatous germ cell tumor (74 nodes; COG stage III). The nephrectomy yielded an undifferentiated sarcoma, low grade; the adrenalectomy favorable-type ganglioneuroma.

DISCUSSION

In pediatrics, urologic oncology cases are often managed with open surgery. Our series demonstrates the feasibility of using the robotic approach in carefully selected cases. In doing so, the patient benefits from a minimally invasive surgery, while the surgeon benefits from robotic surgical dexterity. We seamlessly advanced these new techniques through a step-wise collaboration between an adult urologist who routinely performs robotic oncology procedures and a pediatric urologist experienced in robotics for benign conditions.

CONCLUSION

In this small series, we safely and effectively adapted adult robotic techniques for genitourinary oncology cases in children and young adults.

Novel robotic systems and future directions

Robot-assistance is increasingly used in surgical practice. We performed a nonsystematic literature review using PubMed/MEDLINE and Google for robotic surgical systems and compiled information on their current status. We also used this information to predict future about the direction of robotic systems based on various robotic systems currently being developed. Currently, various modifications are being made in the consoles, robotic arms, cameras, handles and instruments, and other specific functions (haptic feedback and eye tracking) that make up the robotic surgery system. In addition, research for automated surgery is actively being carried out. The development of future robots will be directed to decrease the number of incisions and improve precision. With the advent of artificial intelligence, a more practical form of robotic surgery system can be introduced and will ultimately lead to the development of automated robotic surgery system.

Laparoscopic Surgery in Urologic Oncology

Background

Techniques in genitourinary oncologic surgery have evolved over the past several years, shifting from traditional open approaches toward minimally invasive routes by laparoscopy.

Methods

We reviewed the literature on laparoscopic surgery for genitourinary cancer, with emphasis on contemporary indications, complications, and oncologic outcome of laparoscopic surgery for urologic malignancies.

Results

All urologic oncology procedures have been performed laparoscopically. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is becoming the preferred approach for managing kidney cancer. The initial experience with nephroureterectomy is encouraging. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is rapidly becoming the standard in Europe and is the procedure of choice in many centers in the United States.

Conclusions

When following the open oncologic principles for the surgical treatment of malignancies, laparoscopy offers similar oncologic clinical outcomes, less morbidity, improved operative precision, and reduced convalescence time.

Past, present and future of urological robotic surgery

The first urologic robotic program in the world was built at the Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital Detroit, Michigan, in 2000 under the vision of surgical innovator, Dr. Mani Menon for the radical prostatectomy. The robot-assisted radical prostatectomy continues being modified with techniques to improve perioperative and surgical outcomes. The application of robotic surgical technique has since been expanded to the bladder and upper urinary tract surgery. The evolution of surgical technique and its expansion of application will continue to improve quality, outcome parameters and experience for the patients.

Extended lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: lymph node yield and distribution of metastases

In this study, we reported our experience performing robotic extended lymph node dissection (eLND) in patients with prostate cancer. A total of 147 patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer who underwent robotic eLND from May 2008 to December 2011 were included in this analysis. The dissection template extended to the ureter crossing the iliac vessels. We assessed lymph node yield, lymph node positivity, and perioperative outcomes. Lymph node positivity was also evaluated according to the number of lymph nodes (LNs) removed (<22 vs ≥22). The median number of LNs removed was 22 (11–51), and 97 positive LNs were found in 24 patients (16.3%). While the obturator fossa was the most common site for LN metastases (42.3%, 41/97), the internal iliac area was the most common area for a single positive LN packet (20.8%, 5/24). Eight patients (33.3%, 8/24) had positive LNs at the common iliac area. The incidence of positive LNs did not differ according to the number of LNs removed. Complications associated with eLND occurred in 21 patients (14.3%) and symptomatic lymphocele was found in five patients (3.4%). In conclusion, robotic eLND can be performed with minimal morbidity. Furthermore, LN yield and the node positive rate achieved using this robotic technique are comparable to those of open series. In addition, the extent of dissection is more important than the absolute number of LNs removed in eLND, and the robotic technique is not a prohibitive factor for performing eLND.

How to minimize lymphoceles and treat clinically symptomatic lymphoceles after radical prostatectomy

The development of a lymphocele after pelvic surgery is a well-documented complication, especially where pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is part of the operation. However, not all lymphoceles are symptomatic and require treatment. Most lymphoceles spontaneously resolve, and even lymphoceles that become symptomatic may resolve without any intervention. Robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a common operation in urology where PLND is likely to be performed in intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients. The rationale for performing a PLND in prostate cancer is for accurate staging and potential therapeutic benefits. However, due to potential intraoperative and postoperative complications there is still a debate regarding the value of PLND in prostate cancer. In this review, we will discuss the potential risk factors to be aware of in pelvic surgery in order to minimize the formation of a lymphocele, along with the management for clinically significant lymphoceles.

Impact of intraoperative fluid administration on outcome in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy--a retrospective analysis

Background

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) gained much popularity during the last decade. Although the influence of intraoperative fluid management on patients’ outcome has been largely discussed in general, its impact on perioperative complications and length of hospitalization in patients undergoing RALP has not been examined so far. We hypothesized that a more restrictive fluid management might lead to a shortened length of hospitalization and a decreased rate of complications in our patients.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of data of 182 patients undergoing RALP at an University Hospital (first series of RALP performed at the center).

Results

The amount of fluid administered was initially normalized for body mass index of the patient and the duration of the operation and additionally corrected for age and the interaction of these variables. The application of crystalloids (multiple linear regression model, estimate = -0.044, p = 0.734) had no effect on the length of hospitalization, whereas a negative effect was found for colloids (estimate = -8.317, p = 0.021). Additionally, a significant interaction term between age and the amount of colloid applied (estimate = 0.129, p = 0.028) was calculated. Evaluation of the influence of intraoperative fluid administration using multiple logistic regression models corrected for body mass index, duration of the surgery and additionally for age revealed a negative effect of crystalloids on the incidence of an anastomotic leak between bladder and urethra (estimate = -23.860, p = 0.017), with a significant interaction term between age and the amount of crystalloids (estimate = 0.396, p = 0.0134). Colloids had no significant effect on this particular complication (estimate = 1.887, p = 0.524). Intraoperative blood loss did not alter the incidence of an anastomotic leak (estimate = 0.001, p = 0.086), nor did it affect the length of hospitalization (estimate = 0.0001, p = 0.351).

Conclusions

In accordance to the findings of our study, we suggest that a standardized, more restrictive fluid management might be beneficial in patients undergoing RALP. In older patients this measure would be able to shorten the length of hospitalization and to decrease the incidence of anastomosis leakage as a major complication.

Oncological and functional outcomes of 722 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) cases: The largest Canadian 5-year experience

INTRODUCTION

While RARP (robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy) has become the predominant surgical approach to treat localized prostate cancer, there is little Canadian data on its oncological and functional outcomes. We describe the largest RARP experience in Canada.

METHODS

Data from 722 patients who underwent RARP performed by 7 surgeons (AEH performed 288, TH 69, JBL 23, SB 17, HW 15, QT 7, and KCZ 303 patients) were collected prospectively from October 2006 to December 2013. Preoperative characteristics, as well as postoperative surgical and pathological outcomes, were collected. Functional and oncological outcomes were also assessed up to 72 months postoperative.

RESULTS

The median follow-up (Q1-Q3) was 18 months (9-36). The D'Amico risk stratification distribution was 31% low, 58% intermediate and 11% high-risk. The median operative time was 178 minutes (142-205), blood loss was 200 mL (150-300) and the postoperative hospital stay was 1 day (1-23). The transfusion rate was only 1.0%. There were 0.7% major (Clavien III-IV) and 10.1% minor (Clavien I-II) postoperative complications, with no mortality. Pathologically, 445 men (70%) were stage pT2, of which 81 (18%) had a positive surgical margin (PSM). In addition, 189 patients (30%) were stage pT3 and 87 (46%) with PSM. Urinary continence (0-pads/day) returned at 3, 6, and 12 months for 68%, 80%, and 90% of patients, respectively. Overall, the potency rates (successful penetration) for all men at 6, 12, and 24 months were 37%, 52%, and 59%, respectively. Biochemical recurrence was observed in 28 patients (4.9%), and 14 patients (2.4%) were referred for early salvage radiotherapy. In total, 49 patients (8.4%) underwent radio-therapy and/or hormonal therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows similar results compared to other high-volume RARP programs. Being the largest RARP experience in Canada, we report that RARP is safe with acceptable oncologic outcomes in a Canadian setting.

The rise and fall of prostate brachytherapy: use of brachytherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in the National Cancer Data Base

BACKGROUND

Brachytherapy has been shown to be an efficacious and cost-effective treatment among patients with localized prostate cancer. In this study, the authors examined trends in brachytherapy use for localized prostate cancer using a large national cancer registry.

METHODS

In the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), a total of 1,547,941 patients with localized prostate cancer were identified from 1998 through 2010. Excluding patients with lymph node-positive or metastatic disease, the authors examined primary treatment trends focusing on the use of brachytherapy over time. Patients with available data (2004-2009) were stratified by National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk criteria. Controlling for year of diagnosis and demographic, clinical, and pathologic characteristics, multivariate analyses were performed examining the association between patient characteristics and receipt of brachytherapy.

RESULTS

In the study cohort, brachytherapy use reached a peak of 16.7% in 2002, and then steadily declined to a low of 8% in 2010. Of the 719,789 patients with available data for risk stratification, 41.1%, 35.3%, and 23.6%, respectively, met low, intermediate, and high National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk criteria. After adjustment, patients of increasing age and those with Medicare insurance were more likely to receive brachytherapy. In contrast, patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk disease, Medicaid insurance, increasing comorbidity count, and increasing year of diagnosis were less likely to receive brachytherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with localized prostate cancer who are treated at National Cancer Data Base institutions, there has been a steady decline in brachytherapy use since 2003. For low-risk patients, the declining use of brachytherapy monotherapy compared with more costly emerging therapies has significant health policy implications.

Retrograde robotic radical prostatectomy: description of a new technique and early perioperative outcomes

Objectives. This research was conducted to describe a novel technique for performing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) using a retrograde approach that mimics the classic open surgical technique. Methods. From June 2009 to March 2011, we performed 18 nonconsecutive RALPs using a novel retrograde approach. Patients were initially selected with D'Amico low to intermediate risk disease. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative data were analyzed in all patients. Results. All 18 patients had successful surgery without any intraoperative complications. Mean preoperative PSA was 6.0 ng/mL. Nine patients had biopsy Gleason score (GS) 6, seven patients had GS 7, and two patients had GS 8. Fourteen patients had clinical stage T1c and four patients had stage T2a. Mean operative time was 198 minutes, with a mean robotic console time of 168 minutes. Fifteen patients had T2 disease on the final pathology and three had T3 disease. With a median follow-up of 11 months, 10 patients had an undetectable PSA. Conclusions. Our early experience with retrograde robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy demonstrates the feasibility of this approach with early outcomes comparable to the contemporary antegrade approach. Long-term study with a greater number of patients will be necessary to fully evaluate the oncologic and functional outcomes using this technique.

Developing a robotic prostatectomy service and a robotic fellowship programme - defining the learning curve

INTRODUCTION

Robotic radical prostatectomy (RRP) is an established treatment for prostate cancer in selected centres with appropriate expertise. We studied our single-centre experience of developing a RRP service and subsequent training of 2 additional surgeons by the initial surgeon and the introduction of United Kingdom's first nationally accredited robotic fellowship training programme. We assessed the learning curve of the 3 surgeons with regard to peri-operative outcomes and oncological results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred consecutive patients underwent RRP between November 2008 and August 2012. Patients were divided into 3 equal groups (Group 1, case 1-100; Group 2, case 101-200; and Group 3, case 201-300). Age, ASA score, preoperative co-morbidities and indications for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were comparable for all 3 patient groups. Peri-operative and oncological outcomes were compared across all 3 groups to assess the impact of the learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. All surgical complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo system.

RESULTS

The mean age was 60.7 years (range 41-74). There was a significant reduction in the mean console time (p < 0.001), operating time (p < 0.001), mean length of hospital stay (p < 0.001) and duration of catheter (p < 0.001) between the 3 groups as the series progressed. The two most important factors predictive of positive surgical margins (PSM) at RRP were the initial prostate specific antigen (PSA) and tumor stage at diagnosis. The overall PSM rate was 26.7%. For T2/T3 tumors the incidence of PSM reduced as the series progressed (Group 1-22%, Group 2-32% and Group 3-26%). The incidence of major complications i.e. grade Clavien-Dindo system score ≤ III was 2% (6/300).

CONCLUSION

RRP is a safe procedure with low morbidity. As surgeons progress through the learning curve peri-operative parameters and oncological outcomes improve. This learning curve is not affected by the introduction of a fellowship-training programme. Using a carefully structured mentored approach, RRP can be safely introduced as a new procedure without compromising patient outcomes.

Advances in Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy over Time

Since the introduction of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP), robotics has become increasingly more commonplace in the armamentarium of the urologic surgeon. Robotic utilization has exploded across surgical disciplines well beyond the fields of urology and prostate surgery. The literature detailing technical steps, comparison of large surgical series, and even robotically focused randomized control trials are available for review. RALP, the first robot-assisted surgical procedure to achieve widespread use, has recently become the primary approach for the surgical management of localized prostate cancer. As a result, surgeons are constantly trying to refine and improve upon current technical aspects of the operation. Recent areas of published modifications include bladder neck anastomosis and reconstruction, bladder drainage, nerve sparing approaches and techniques, and perioperative and postoperative management including penile rehabilitation. In this review, we summarize recent advances in perioperative management and surgical technique for RALP.

The impact of robotic surgery in urology

INTRODUCTION

More than a decade ago, robotic surgery was introduced into urology. Since then, the urological community started to look at surgery from a different angle. The present, the future hopes, and the way we looked at our past experience have all changed.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2011, the published literature was reviewed using the National Library of Medicine database and the following key words: robotic surgery, robot-assisted, and radical prostatectomy. Special emphasis was given to the impact of the robotic surgery in urology. We analyzed the most representative series (finished learning curve) in each one of the robotic approaches regarding perioperative morbidity and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

This article looks into the impact of robotics in urology, starting from its background applications before urology, the way it was introduced into urology, its first steps, current status, and future expectations. By narrating this journey, we tried to highlight important modifications that helped robotic surgery make its way to its position today. We looked as well into the dramatic changes that robotic surgery introduced to the field of surgical training and its consequence on its learning curve.

CONCLUSION

Basic surgical principles still apply in Robotics: experience counts, and prolonged practice provides knowledge and skills. In this way, the potential advantages delivered by technology will be better exploited, and this will be reflected in better outcomes for patients.

Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection

BACKGROUND

During the past 20 years, laparoscopy has revolutionized colorectal surgery. With proven benefits in patient outcomes and healthcare utilization, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has steadily increased in use. Robotic surgery, a new addition to colorectal surgery, has been suggested to facilitate and overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic resection (RALR) to laparoscopic resections (LAP) in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A national inpatient database was evaluated for colorectal resections performed over a 30-month period. Cases were divided into traditional LAP and RALR resection groups. Cost of robot acquisition and servicing were not measured. Main outcome measures were hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, complications, and costs between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 17,265 LAP and 744 RARL procedures were identified. The RALR cases had significantly higher total cost ($5,272 increase, p < 0.001) and direct cost ($4,432 increase, p < 0.001), significantly longer operating time (39 min, p < 0.001), and were more likely to develop postoperative bleeding (odds ratio 1.6; p = 0.014) than traditional laparoscopic patients. LOS, complications, and discharge disposition were comparable. Similar findings were noted for both laparoscopic colonic and rectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

RALR had significantly higher costs and operative time than traditional LAP without a measurable benefit.

Positive surgical margins after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in patients with pT2 and pT3a disease could be considered pathological upstaging

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prognostic significance of positive surgical margins (PSMs) after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) in interaction with other established prognosis factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed data prospectively collected between 1998 and 2010 for 4628 consecutive patients who underwent MIRP for clinically localized prostate cancer. The impact of PSM on biochemical recurrence (BCR), defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >0.2 ng/mL, was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Estimates of BCR-free survival were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared among groups using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 55 months. On multivariable analysis, PSM was an independent prognostic factor for BCR (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.14 for PSMs vs negative surgical margins (NSMs); 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.86-2.45; P < 0.001). Other independent predictors for BCR were preoperative PSA, date of surgery, pT stage, Gleason score and lymph node involvement (all P < 0.001). The 5-year BCR-free probability was 80.6% (95% CI: 79-82.2) for NSMs vs 51% (95% CI: 47-55) for PSMs (log-rank P < 0.001). Patients with pT2 and pT3a PSMs had a similar prognosis to those with pT3a and pT3b NSMs, respectively (log-rank P ≥ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A PSM after MIRP is associated with 2.14-fold increased risk of BCR. In patients with pT2 and pT3a disease, a PSM could be considered a pathological upstaging.

Relative effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy.

METHODS

A care pathway was described. We performed a systematic literature review based on a search of Medline, Medline in Process, Embase, Biosis, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Current Controlled Trials, Clinical Trials, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and NIH Reporter, the Health Technology Assessment databases, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and relevant conference abstracts up to 31st October 2010). Additionally, reference lists were scanned, an expert panel consulted, and websites of manufacturers, professional organisations, and regulatory bodies were checked. We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies, published after 1st January 1995, including men with localised prostate cancer undergoing robot-assisted or laparoscopic prostatectomy compared with the other procedure or with open prostatectomy. Studies where at least 90% of included men had clinical tumour stages T1 to T2 and which reported at least one of our specified outcomes were eligible for inclusion. A mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis was performed to generate comparative statistics on specified outcomes.

RESULTS

We included data from 19 064 men across one RCT and 57 non-randomised comparative reports. Robotic prostatectomy had a lower risk of major intra-operative harms such as organ injury [0.4% robotic vs 2.9% laparoscopic], odds ratio ([OR] {95% credible interval [CrI]} 0.16 [0.03 to 0.76]), and a lower rate of surgical margins positive for cancer [17.6% robotic vs 23.6% laparoscopic], OR [95% CrI] 0.69 [0.51 to 0.96]). There was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of men with urinary incontinence at 12 months (OR [95% CrI] 0.55 [0.09 to 2.84]). There were insufficient data on sexual dysfunction. Surgeon learning rates for the procedures did not differ, although data were limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Men undergoing robotic prostatectomy appear to have reduced surgical morbidity, and a lower risk of a positive surgical margin, which may reduce rates of cancer recurrence and the need for further treatment, but considerable uncertainty surrounds these results. We found no evidence that men undergoing robotic prostatectomy are disadvantaged in terms of early outcomes. We were unable to determine longer-term relative effectiveness.

Biochemical outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with follow-up more than 5-years

In this study, we assessed biochemical outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Between July 2005 and November 2007, one hundred and seventy-six consecutive patients treated by RARP without neoadjuvant treatment were included in this study. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon and the median follow-up period was 60 months (interquartile range (IQR): 59-69). The median prostate specific antigen was 7.50 ng ml(-1) (IQR: 5.14-11.45) and 39.2% of the patients were classified as intermediate risk and 15.3% were classified as high risk; on final pathological examination, 35.2% of the patients had non-organ confined disease and 37.5% and 14.2% had Gleason scores of 7 and 8-10, respectively. The biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival rates at 3 and 5 years were 85.6% and 81.2%, respectively. The 5-year BCR-free survival rates stratified by pathologic Gleason scores were 93.1% in Gleason scores of 6 or less, 74.5% in a Gleason score of 7, and 58.1% in Gleason scores of 8 or greater, respectively (P<0.001). When stratified by pathologic stage, the BCR-free survival rates were 89.8% in pT2 patients, 66.2% in pT3a patients, and 39.3% in pT3b patients at 5 years following RARP, respectively (P<0.001). Preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA), pathologic stage, postoperative Gleason score and surgical margin status were independently associated with BCR in multivariate analysis. In this study, we report biochemical outcomes after RARP with the longest follow-up periods to date in Asian men. We found that robotic surgery provided satisfactory biochemical outcomes, and that RARP is a safe and effective procedure in terms of oncologic outcomes.

Hemodynamic changes during robotic radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Effect on hemodynamic changes and experience of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) in steep Trendelenburg position (45°) with high-pressure CO(2) pneumoperitoneum is very limited. Therefore, we planned this prospective clinical trial to study the effect of steep Tredelenburg position with high-pressure CO(2) pneumoperitoneum on hemodynamic parameters in a patient undergoing RALRP using FloTrac/Vigileo™1.10.

METHODS

After ethical approval and informed consent, 15 patients scheduled for RALRP were included in the study. In the operation room, after attaching standard monitors, the radial artery was cannulated. Anesthesia was induced with fentanyl (2 μg/kg) and thiopentone (4-7 mg/kg), and tracheal intubation was facilitated by vecuronium bromide (0.1 mg/kg). The patient's right internal jugular vein was cannulated and the Pre Sep™ central venous oximetry catheter was connected to it. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen and nitrous oxide and intermittent boluses of vecuronium. Intermittent positive-pressure ventilation was provided to maintain normocapnea. After CO(2) pneumoperitoneum, position of the patient was gradually changed to 45° Trendelenburg over 5 min. The robot was then docked and the robot-assisted surgery started. Intraoperative monitoring included central venous pressure (CVP), stroke volume (SV), stroke volume variation (SVV), cardiac output (CO), cardiac index (CI) and central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO(2)).

RESULTS

After induction of anesthesia, heart rate (HR), SV, CO and CI were decreased significantly from the baseline value (P>0.05). SV, CO and CI further decreased significantly after creating pneumoperitoneum (P>0.05). At the 45° Trendelenburg position, HR, SV, CO and CI were significantly decreased compared with baseline. Thereafter, CO and CI were persistently low throughout the 45° Trendelenburg position (P=0.001). HR at 20 min and 1 h, SV and mean arterial blood pressure after 2 h decreased significantly from the baseline value (P>0.05) during the 45° Trendelenburg position. CVP increased significantly after creating pneumoperitoneum and at the 45° Trendelenburg position (after 5 and 20 min) compared with the baseline postinduction value (P>0.05). All these parameters returned to baseline after deflation of CO(2) pneumoperitoneum in the supine position. There were no significant changes in SVV and ScvO(2) throughout the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

The steep Trendelenburg position and CO(2) pneumoperitoneum, during RALRP, leads to significant decrease in stroke volume and cardiac output.

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic radical prostatectomy

The purpose of this publication is to document the evolution of a new surgical procedure for the treatment of carefully selected patients with organ confined localized prostate cancer. Natural orifice surgery represents a paradigm shift in the surgical approach to disease, although its adoption into clinical practice has been limited to date. This manuscript describes the development of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgical radical prostatectomy (NOTES RP). The laboratory, animal, preclinical and early clinical experiences are described and detailed. While the early experiences with this approach are promising and encouraging, more information is required. Despite the early successes with the procedure, long-term oncological and functional outcomes are essential and more work needs to be done to facilitate the teaching and ease of the NOTES RP.

Trends in radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has been widely adopted for radical prostatectomy. We hypothesized that this change is rapidly shifting procedures away from hospitals that do not offer robotics and consequently increasing patient travel.

METHODS

A population-based observational study of all prostatectomies for cancer in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania from 2000 to 2009 was performed using hospital discharge data. Hospital procedure volume was defined as the number of prostatectomies performed for cancer in a given year. Straight-line travel distance to the treating hospital was calculated for each case. Hospitals were contacted to determine the year of acquisition of the first robot.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2009, the total number of prostatectomies performed annually increased substantially. The increase occurred almost entirely at the very high-volume centers (≥ 106 prostatectomies/year). The number of hospitals performing prostatectomy fell 37% from 2000 to 2009. By 2009, the 9% (21/244) of hospitals that had very high volume performed 57% of all prostatectomies, and the 35% (86/244) of hospitals with a robot performed 85% of all prostatectomies. The median travel distance increased 54% from 2000 to 2009 (P<.001). The proportion of patients traveling ≥ 15 miles increased from 24% to 40% (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past decade, the number of radical prostatectomies performed has risen substantially. These procedures have been increasingly centralized at high-volume centers, leading to longer patient travel distances. Few prostatectomies are now performed at hospitals that do not offer robotic surgery.

Designing a robotic colorectal program

Designing a successful robotic colorectal program requires consideration and implementation of several important concepts with continued perseverance through many obstacles that may arise. The ideal strategy is to establish a core group of committed individuals, define the goals and vision of the program, enlist corporate partners, and gain financial support with a sound business, educational, and research plan. Factors such as cost, limited availability, and demanding training are often hindrances to the implementation of a new robotic colorectal program while scheduling conflicts and inadequate resources may present obstacles to developing a colorectal program in institutions with existing robotic surgical programs. In developing a business plan one should consider the potential for increased patient referrals and the benefits of reduced hospital stay, decreased infection and complication rates, and quicker recovery compared with open surgical procedures. The optimal robotics surgical staff will include those most eager to be trained, as they are highly motivated and have the greatest enthusiasm to succeed. The early foundation of accomplishment will be vital to the long-term success of the program. In addition to building the ideal surgical team, patient selection is one of the most crucial considerations in developing a successful robotics program. Initiating a positive impression for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal procedures will be an important precursor to continued success. Likewise, maintaining a regular schedule of procedures may advance the team's competencies and deter complacency. Proper planning, deliberate implementation, and sustained perseverance are key to the successful initiation of a robotic colorectal program.

Robotic technologies in surgical oncology training and practice

The modern-day surgeon is frequently exposed to new technologies and instrumentation. Robotic surgery (RS) has evolved as a minimally invasive technique aimed to improve clinical outcomes. RS has the potential to alleviate the inherent limitations of laparoscopic surgery such as two dimensional imaging, limited instrument movement and intrinsic human tremor. Since the first reported robot-assisted surgical procedure performed in 1985, the technology has dramatically evolved and currently multiple surgical specialties have incorporated RS into their daily clinical armamentarium. With this exponential growth, it should not come as a surprise the ever growing requirement for surgeons trained in RS as well as the interest from residents to receive robotic exposure during their training. For this reason, the establishment of set criteria for adequate and standardized training and credentialing of surgical residents, fellows and those trained surgeons wishing to perform RS has become a priority. In this rapidly evolving field, we herein review the past, present and future of robotic technologies and its penetration into different surgical specialties.