The evolution and resurgence of perineal prostatectomy in the robotic surgical era

Application of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in men over 75 years: an analysis of comparative outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize the current evidence regarding the feasibility of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in men aged over 75 years.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of four electronic databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) was performed to identify eligible comparative studies as of April 2022. Parameters, including perioperative results and oncological and functional outcomes, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seven articles with 7575 patients undergoing RARP were included in this study. Patients with prostate cancer were grouped by age ≥ 75 years versus < 75 years. Our results demonstrated that compared with the older group, the younger group had better potency (p < .00001). However, there were no significant differences in operation time (p = .29), estimated blood loss (p = .13), length of hospital stay (p = .48), complications (p = .22), continence (p = .21), positive surgical margin (p = .28), and biochemical recurrence (p = .74) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes in men aged over 75 years undergoing RARP were not significantly different from those of their younger counterparts. RARP is feasible in men aged over 75 years.

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).

Single-port Transvesical Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: The Surgical Learning Curve of the First 100 Cases

OBJECTIVE

To determine the number of cases required to reach plateau performance.

METHODS

We performed a single-surgeon review of the first 100 consecutive procedures. All procedures were performed using the da Vinci single-port robotic system between November 2020 and March 2022. Time was used as the measure of the learning curve (LC). Relevant surgical steps were considered separately for detailed analysis. Data were collected retrospectively and analyzed through the cumulative sum method and moving average graphing. A comparative analysis was done between subgroups of 20 consecutive cases for perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

All cases were completed successfully, without extra ports or conversion. The LC for prostate excision showed initial exponential improvement and reached plateau at case 28. Vesicourethral anastomosis time gradually shortened over time, with a clear inflection point at case 10. Total operative time rapidly improved and plateaued early to 213.0 minutes. Robot-docking and undocking, achieving hemostasis, wound closure, and intraoperative idle times were consistent throughout the series. Estimated blood loss decreased significantly after the first 20 cases (from median of 135.0-88.0 mL, P = .03).

CONCLUSION

In our early experience, the LC for single-port transvesical robot-assisted radical prostatectomy suggests that performance improved after 10-30 cases in the hands of an experienced robotic surgeon.

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Where Do We Stand?

In 2018, the da Vinci Single Port (SP) robotic system was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for urologic procedures. Available studies for the application of SP to prostate cancer surgery are limited. The aim of our study is to summarize the current evidence on the techniques and outcomes of SP robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARLP) procedures. A narrative review of the literature was performed in January 2023. Preliminary results suggest that SP-RALP is safe and feasible, and it can offer comparable outcomes to the standard multiport RALP. Extraperitoneal and transvesical SP-RALP appear to be the two most promising approaches, as they offer decreased invasiveness, potentially shorter length of stay, and better pain control. Long-term, high-quality data are missing and further validation with prospective studies across different sites is required.

Anatomical Fundamentals and Current Surgical Knowledge of Prostate Anatomy Related to Functional and Oncological Outcomes for Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Context

Meticulous knowledge about the anatomy of the prostate and surrounding tissue represents a crucial and mandatory requirement during radical prostatectomy for reliable oncological and excellent replicable, functional outcomes. Since its introduction two decades ago, robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has evolved to become the predominant surgical approach in many industrialized countries.

Objective

To provide and highlight currently available literature regarding prostate anatomy and to help in improving oncological and functional outcomes in RALP.

Methods/Evidence Acquiring

PubMed database was searched using the following keywords: “robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy,” “anatomy,” “neurovascular bundle,” “nerve,” “periprostatic fascia,” “pelvis,” “sphincter,” “urethra,” “urinary incontinence,” and “erectile dysfunction.” Relevant articles and book chapters were critically reviewed and if eligible, they were included in this review.

Results

New evidence in regards to prostatic anatomy and surgical approaches in RALP has been reported in recent years. Besides detailed anatomical studies investigating the meticulous structure of the fascial structures surrounding the prostate and neurovascular bundle preservation, debate about the optimal RALP approach is still ongoing, inspired by recent publications presenting promising functional outcomes following modifications in surgical approaches.

Conclusions

This review provides a detailed overview of the current knowledge of prostate anatomy, its surrounding tissue, and its influence on key surgical step development for RALP.

Outpatient versus inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis of comparative outcomes

PURPOSE

To provide a systematic analysis of outcomes comparing outpatient and inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer based on the best available evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) was conducted to determine eligible comparative studies as of July 2021. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Parameters including perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 2721 patients were included, of which 831 underwent outpatient RARP and 1890 underwent inpatient RARP. The combined results demonstrated that compared with the inpatient group, the outpatient group had shorter operation time (WMD -8.59 95% CI -14.08 to -3.10, p = 0.002) and lower overall complication rate (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.95, p = 0.03). However, there were no significant differences regarding estimated blood loss, readmission rate, positive surgical margin, and urinary continence rates between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient RARP does not increase the incidence of complications and readmissions compared with inpatient RARP. This suggests that routine same-day discharge after providing patients with RARP is safe and feasible.

Perioperative Outcomes Between Single-Port and "Multi-Port" Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Where do we stand?

OBJECTIVES

To report the results of the first quantitative synthesis of literature data from studies comparing Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy performed using the novel SP surgical platform (SP-RARP) versus RARP performed by using multi-arms robotic systems.

METHODS

Studies comparing the use of da Vinci SP versus that of other available multi-arms da Vinci platforms were eligible for inclusion in the present review. From selected studies, data were extracted by using a standardized data extraction form. Patients baseline demographics and disease characteristics and perioperative variables of interest for the present review (operative time, blood losses, complications, length of stay and positive surgical margins rate) were noted whenever available. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was used as a summary measure for continuous outcomes, whereas the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for binary variables. Pooled estimates were calculated by using the random-effect model to account for clinical heterogeneity. Statistical analysis was performed using Review manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

Four comparative studies were retrieved, analysing a total of 610 patients. Baseline characteristics of treatment groups were statistically similar. No significant differences were found when comparing SP-RARP versus multi-arms robotic systems in terms of operative time, blood losses, complications rate and positive surgical margins. Conversely, SP-RARP was found to allow for a shorter hospital stay (WMD = -0.79 days, 95% CI = -1.07; -0.52, P-value < .001).

CONCLUSION

The adoption of the SP platform for duplicating the technique of minimally-invasive RARP appears to be safe and feasible.

Minimizing minimally invasive surgery: Current status of the single-port robotic surgery in Urology

BACKGROUND

The novel da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robotic platform received the US FDA approval in 2018. The device, specifically conceived for single-site approach, is pushing through the limits of minimally invasive surgery. We sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of the clinical experiences accomplished by the da Vinci SP in urology, and to discuss future perspectives.

METHODS

A non-systematic literature review was performed focusing on single port articles in urological surgery using Medline/PubMed and Embase search electronic engines. The authors analyzed findings and a brief report of the clinical experience for surgical procedures completed by the SP platform was described.

RESULTS

The current data available from single-port robotic established the safety and feasibility of urologic procedures using this novel platform. However, the results come from single-center case series, small cohorts and retrospective studies that need to be cautiously interpreted. Additional evidence is required to determine the asset of the SP platform in the urological community.

CONCLUSIONS

The SP robotic system opens new frontiers on the surgical scenery facilitating the completion of urological surgeries through a single incision. Further comparative studies will be required to assess perioperative and long-term oncological and functional outcomes among SP, multi-arm robotic and open approaches.

Minimizing minimally invasive surgery: Current status of the single-port robotic surgery in Urology

BACKGROUND

The novel da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robotic platform received the US FDA approval in 2018. The device, specifically conceived for single-site approach, is pushing through the limits of minimally invasive surgery. We sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of the clinical experiences accomplished by the da Vinci SP in urology, and to discuss future perspectives.

METHODS

A non-systematic literature review was performed focusing on single port articles in urological surgery using Medline/PubMed and Embase search electronic engines. The authors analyzed findings and a brief report of the clinical experience for surgical procedures completed by the SP platform was described.

RESULTS

The current data available from single-port robotic established the safety and feasibility of urologic procedures using this novel platform. However, the results come from single-center case series, small cohorts and retrospective studies that need to be cautiously interpreted. Additional evidence is required to determine the asset of the SP platform in the urological community.

CONCLUSIONS

The SP robotic system opens new frontiers on the surgical scenery facilitating the completion of urological surgeries through a single incision. Further comparative studies will be required to assess perioperative and long-term oncological and functional outcomes among SP, multi-arm robotic and open approaches.

Predictive factors of postoperative complications and hospital readmission after implementation of the single-port robotic platform: A single-center and single-surgeon experience

OBJECTIVES

To measure the incidence, and identify potential risk factors of conversion, postoperative complication and readmission for patients treated with urological robotic single-port surgery.

METHODS

All consecutive urological surgery procedures carried out with the single-port robotic platform by the same surgeon in a single institution between September 2018 and March 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. Demographic data, main perioperative outcomes and information related to the surgical technique were gathered and analyzed. A logistic regression model was used to assess predictive factors for any grade and high-grade (e.g. Clavien grade ≥3) postoperative complications, as well as predictive factors for readmission.

RESULTS

Analysis included 221 patients, of whom 194 (88%) underwent pelvic surgery and 27 (12.2%) underwent upper urinary tract surgery. Only one patient was converted to open surgery in the entire cohort. A total of 40 patients (18.1%) experienced postoperative complications, with grade ≥3 postoperative complications in 7.6% of the entire cohort. On multivariable analysis, the factors significantly associated with the risk of postoperative complication of any grade were diabetes (P < 0.001), perineal approach (P < 0.01) and postoperative pain management with opioids (P = 0.01). Only diabetes (P = 0.03) predicted a grade ≥3 complication. Overall, 17 patients (7.7%) were readmitted during the 3 months after surgery. A body mass index >30 kg/m² was the only identified predictor of readmission (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A wide range of pelvic, extraperitoneal and upper-tract urological procedures can be carried out using the robotic single-port platform with a minimal conversion rate and low complication or readmission rate.

Robotic radical perineal prostatectomy: tradition and evolution in the robotic era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an updated review of robotic radical perineal prostatectomy (r-RPP) with emphasis on the recent advances in terms of surgical technique, outcomes, and new robotic platforms.

RECENT FINDING

The technological innovations in the urological field have been applied to radical prostatectomy with the aim of preserving important anatomical structures and reduce patients' morbidity and mortality. In recent years, robotic surgery contributed to resurge radical perineal prostatectomy. In 2014, the Cleveland Clinic group was the first to demonstrate the utility of a robotic approach in RPP. To date, the majority of the reported studies showed that r-RPP has noninferior perioperative, short-term oncological, and functional outcomes compared with the traditional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Given these benefits, r-RPP is a promising approach in selected patients, such as obese ones. Moreover, robotic perineal pelvic lymph node dissection performed through the same incision of r-RPP and the new Single-Port (SP) Robotic System represent further steps towards the overcoming of some intrinsic limitation of this surgical approach making this technique suitable for a larger number of patients with prostatic cancer.

SUMMARY

Overall, r-RPP represents a reliable and effective novel surgical technique. However, more studies with long-term follow-up are needed to clarify the advantages over RARP.

Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Perineal Approach: Technique and Single-surgeon Matched-paired Comparative Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) has been revived with the advent of single-port (SP) robotic surgery. However, its interest and precise role need to be evaluated and better defined.

OBJECTIVE

To describe in detail the technique of SP-RPP and compare initial perioperative outcomes with those of multiport robot-assisted transperitoneal radical prostatectomy (MP-RARP).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From October 2018 to June 2020, perioperative data of 26 consecutive patients who underwent SP-RPP for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in a single institution were prospectively entered into an institutional review board-approved database. Data of 86 consecutive patients treated from September 2017 to September 2018 with MP-RARP by the same surgeon, before the beginning of the SP experience, were used as comparators.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

SP-RPP was performed using the SP robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) according to the technique described in the supplementary video.

MEASUREMENTS

Demographics, and intra- and postoperative data were analyzed in a matched-paired design with a 1:1 ratio on the following factors: age at surgery, prostate-specific antigen level, preoperative Gleason score, and history of abdominal surgery.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

After matching, baseline characteristics were comparable except for the rate of prior laparotomy, which was higher in the SP-RPP group (52% vs 8%, p < 0.001). In the SP-RPP group, 84% of the patients had a high risk and an unfavorable intermediate risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs) versus 57% in the MP-RARP group (p = 0.03). While the rate of nonlimited PSMs (ie, >3 mm) was higher in the SP-RPP group (38.5% vs 7.7%, p < 0.01), the number of patients with biochemical recurrence at 1 yr was comparable between SP-RPP and MP-RARP (1 vs 3, p = 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

SP-RPP is a complex procedure for patients with a complex surgical history and high-risk localized PCa with limited alternative therapeutic options.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our study suggests that patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer and limited treatment options due to a complex abdominal surgical history (ie, frozen pelvis) may be suitable candidates for single-port radical perineal prostatectomy.

Applications of the da Vinci single port (SP) robotic platform in urology: a systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgical technology has evolved to include a new platform specifically designed for the single-port (SP) approach. Benefits of the da Vinci SP are still under investigation. This study aimed to review the urological literature since the first report of the use of the platform.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic literature review of PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science databases on June 15, 2020 searching for all available articles of da Vinci SP use from December 2014 (date of the first clinical report of da Vinci SP in the urology) until June 1, 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 43 articles were eligible for inclusion. Ten studies reported different surgeries and techniques on cadavers while the rest described the clinical experience of different groups. We divided our article and tables into preclinical experience with surgery on cadavers, radical prostatectomy (RP) approach, and multiple types of procedures described in the same study.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of da Vinci SP in urologic procedures after five years of the first clinical investigation is feasible and safe. Radical prostatectomy is the most common intervention performed with this robot. Some groups described benefits in terms of less postoperative pain and early discharge, especially with the extraperitoneal approach. However, further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are awaited.

Floating docking technique: a simple modification to improve the working space of the instruments during single-port robotic surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the range of motion and ergonomic characteristics of single-port robotic instruments in the setting of the "floating" versus "flat" docking technique using the GelPOINT^® system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The basic principle of the floating docking technique resides in the GelSeal cap and trocar (s) being 8 cm off the skin level with the Alexis^® acting as a conduit between the trocar (s) and the body while preserving insufflation. In the setting of a dry lab study, we measured the range of motion of one robotic instrument with the "floating" and the "flat" docking technique in two different situations depending on whether the distance between the incision and the target was more or less than 10 cm.

RESULTS

The minimum required distances between the target and the tip of the cannula for activation of the wrist and elbow were 5 and 10 cm, respectively. When the target was near to the cannula (i.e., less than 10 cm), the floating technique was associated with a significant increase in the range of motion of the instrument in all directions. The working space volume of the instrument was increased by more than 390% (from 101 to 497 cm³) when the surgeon switched from flat (standard) to the floating technique in the setting of a target close (i.e., less than 10 cm) to the cannula CONCLUSION: The floating docking technique is a simple and effective way to increase the working surgical space, especially in confined and narrow surgical fields with a target closer than 10 cm from the skin.

Artificial intelligence and robotics: a combination that is changing the operating room

PURPOSE

The aim of the current narrative review was to summarize the available evidence in the literature on artificial intelligence (AI) methods that have been applied during robotic surgery.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was performed on MEDLINE/Pubmed and Scopus database on the topics of artificial intelligence, autonomous surgery, machine learning, robotic surgery, and surgical navigation, focusing on articles published between January 2015 and June 2019. All available evidences were analyzed and summarized herein after an interactive peer-review process of the panel.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The preliminary results of the implementation of AI in clinical setting are encouraging. By providing a readout of the full telemetry and a sophisticated viewing console, robot-assisted surgery can be used to study and refine the application of AI in surgical practice. Machine learning approaches strengthen the feedback regarding surgical skills acquisition, efficiency of the surgical process, surgical guidance and prediction of postoperative outcomes. Tension-sensors on the robotic arms and the integration of augmented reality methods can help enhance the surgical experience and monitor organ movements.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of AI in robotic surgery is expected to have a significant impact on future surgical training as well as enhance the surgical experience during a procedure. Both aim to realize precision surgery and thus to increase the quality of the surgical care. Implementation of AI in master-slave robotic surgery may allow for the careful, step-by-step consideration of autonomous robotic surgery.