Hidden incision endoscopic surgery (HIdES) trocar placement for pediatric robotic pyeloplasty: comparison to traditional port placement

Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: a systematic review of the literature

Robotic pyeloplasty has become a natural progression from the development of open, then laparoscopic procedures to treat pediatric patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty (RALP) is now considered a new gold standard in pediatric MIS. A systematic review of the literature retrieved from PubMed and published in the last 10 years (2012-2022) was performed. This review underlines that in all children except the smallest infants, where the open procedure has benefits in terms of duration of general anesthetic and there are limitations in the size of instruments, robotic pyeloplasty is becoming the preferred procedure to perform in patients with UPJO. Results for the robotic approach are extremely promising, with shorter operative times than laparoscopy and equal success rates, length of stay and complications. In case of redo pyeloplasty, RALP is easier to perform than other open or MIS procedures. By 2009, robotic surgery became the most used modality to treat all UPJO and continues to grow in popularity. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children is safe and effective with excellent outcomes, even in redo pyeloplasty or challenging anatomical cases. Moreover, robotic approach shortens the learning curve for junior surgeons, who can readily achieve levels of expertise comparable to senior practitioners. However, there are still concerns regarding the cost associated with this procedure. Further high-quality prospective observational studies and clinical trials, as well as new technologies specific for the pediatric population, are advisable for RALP to reach the level of gold standard.

Scarless laparoscopic incisions in Pfannenstiel (slip): the first 50 cases using an innovative approach in pediatric robotic surgery

Incisions in the supra-pubic region have been described robotic-assisted surgery to improve cosmetic results in adults, but seldom in children. We aimed to present an innovative trocar placement in the Pfannenstiel line, named Scarless Laparoscopic Incisions in Pfannenstiel (SLIP), and evaluate its feasibility for various intra-abdominal procedures and its cosmetic results in pediatric robotic surgery. We performed a monocentric prospective study, including children undergoing robotic-assisted surgeries using a SLIP approach (July 2019-September 2021). Data regarding demographics, surgery, and outcome were collected and reported as median (range), or number (percentage). Cosmetic results were evaluated with a questionnaire. A SLIP approach was performed in 50 children (24 cholecystectomies, 12 splenectomies, 2 cholecystectomies and splenectomies, 9 colonic resections, 2 choledochal cyst resections, and 1 pancreatic pseudocyst resection). Median age was 11 years (2-18) and median weight 35 kg (10.5-80). Conversion to laparoscopy occurred in two cases. Post-operative complications occurred in 5 patients (10%), after colectomies [intrabdominal abscess (n = 3), stoma dysfunction (n = 1), parietal abscess (n = 1)], of which 3 (6%) required reintervention (intrabdominal abscess n = 2, stoma dysfunction n = 1). Regarding scars, 68% (n = 28) of parents and patients reported the maximal score of 5/5 for global satisfaction and 63% (n = 26) had all scars hidden by underwear. SLIP approach is versatile and can be used in supra- and infra-mesocolic robotic-assisted procedures. The low complication rate shows its safety in both young children and teenagers and does not increase operative difficulties. It results in high patient satisfaction regarding scars, and a scarless abdomen.

Assistant port is unnecessary for robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: a comparative cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the postoperative outcomes including the cosmetic results of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) performed with and without assistant port in pediatric population.

METHODS

47 patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction consecutively underwent RALP were stratified as: three-port (Group 1, n = 26) and four-port (Group 2, n = 21). In Group 1, no assistant port was placed and double-J stent was introduced with the aid of an angiocatheter via the percutaneous route. In group 2, an assistant port was placed. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), the Vancouver Scar Scale(VSS), Satava, Clavien classification systems, and success rates were compared.

RESULTS

We found similar success rates for both groups (group 1:96.2%, group 2:100%). Two groups were similar in terms of improvement in the postoperative anteroposterior diameter of the renal pelvis and parenchymal thickness. There was no difference in terms of perioperative and postoperative complication rates (group 1:19.2%, group 2:9.5%). The total PSAS was significantly lower in Group 1 (p < 0.008). No difference was observed for VSS and OSAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an assistant port does not improve the success or complications of RALP, while the cosmetic outcomes are inferior to three-port RALP in children. We suggest avoiding the use of assistant port during RALP in children.

Current practice in robotic surgery among pediatric urologists: A survey study

INTRODUCTION

Since its introduction, robotic surgery has gained most traction among urologists. Pediatric urologists have been slower to adopt the technology compared to their adult counterparts. Our objectives were to understand current practice patterns for robotic surgery among pediatric urologists, to identify perceived barriers, and to identify factors associated with the use of robotic surgery.

METHODS

An anonymous online survey was administered using REDCap to members of the Societies for Pediatric Urology (SPU) including questions about provider demographics and personal practice patterns. Comparisons were made using Pearson's Chi-Squared analysis.

RESULTS

Of 351 SPU members surveyed, 95 completed the survey (27%). Fifty-five (58%) reported performing robotic surgery, 40 (42%) reported not performing robotic surgery. Twenty-seven (28%) reported receiving robotic training in residency, 26 (27%) in fellowship, 34 (36%) in a robotics course, and 30 (32%) with proctored surgery. Cited reasons for not performing robotic surgery were lack of training, referring to practice partners, and lack of benefit. Of those performing robotic surgery, most reported performing 0-1 or 2-4 per month. Thirty-one (56%) reported having selection criteria for use of the robot: 26 (47%) cited an age cut-off, 12 (22%) a weight cut-off, and 14 (26%) an abdominal size cut-off. Eighteen (33%) reported using hidden incisions endoscopic surgery (HIdES) approach, and 40 (42%) reported using an assistant port. Factors associated with using the robot included surgeon age, years in practice, practice setting, having robotic training, and having practice partners who perform robotic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice variation exists in the use and application of robotic surgery among pediatric urologists. The main self-reported barriers to performing robotic surgery are lack of training, referring to practice partners, and no perceived benefit to robotic surgery. Factors associated with performing robotic surgery were surgeon age, years in practice, practice setting, and having practice partners perform robotic surgery.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pediatric Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty (RALP)

INTRODUCTION

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJ obstruction in children.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the English-language literature on surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJ obstruction in children was performed without time filters using the MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane databases in July 2020 according to the PRISMA statement recommendations.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 58 studies were selected for qualitative analysis, 46 of which were included in the meta-analysis. Nearly all studies included were observational and retrospective, either cohort or case-control. The quality of evidence was assessed using Modified Newcastle Ottawa Scoring, with the majority of studies scoring medium or high quality. The mean success rate was 95.4% (CI 91.0-99.3%), over a wide age range. There was a noticeable heterogeneity in reported follow up length and definitions of success rate. The majority of studies reported length of stay of ~1 day. The mean overall complication rate was 12%. For studies that reported complication rate by grade, the mean low Clavien grade (grade 2 or less) complication rate was 9.3% and the mean high Clavien grade (grade 3 or more) complication rate was 6.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assisted surgery is technically feasible and has been shown to achieve very favorable outcomes for pyeloplasty in children. The evidence however is mostly retrospective and from single sites, which introduces potential biases. Further research is needed to further elucidate RALP benefits compared to the open and laparoscopic approach. As a RCT may not be practical in this space, perhaps a prospective multi-institutional design with a uniform reporting system of pediatric RALP is the next step to define its benefits and limits.

Robotic upper tract surgery in infants 6 months or less: is there enough space?

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) has recently been described in children < 1 year old. However, little data exist on robotic utilization in infants ≤ 6 months old, likely due to concerns for limited intraabdominal space and decreased distance between ports in this cohort. We hypothesized that the robotic approach can be successfully used for infants ≤ 6 months old. A prospectively collected database of patients undergoing urologic robotic surgery at our institution was reviewed. Patients ≤ 6 months and ≥ 4 kg were included. Patient demographics, intraoperative details, hospital length of stay, and complications were reviewed. Descriptive statistics were performed. Twelve patients ≤ 6 months old underwent urologic robotic surgery by three surgeons at our institution (2013-2019): pyeloplasty (6), ureteroureterostomy (4), heminephrectomy (1), and nephrectomy (1). Median age at surgery was 4.75 months (IQR 4, 6). Median weight was 7.09 kg (IQR 6.33, 7.78). Median console time was 105 min (IQR 86, 123). For all procedures, 8-mm robotic arm ports were used. No procedures were converted to open. Median post-operative hospital stay was 24 h (IQR). Febrile UTI was the only complication occurring within 30 days of surgery (n = 4, 33%; 7-20 days, Clavien grade 2). For those undergoing pyeloplasty or ureteroureterostomy (n = 10), postoperative ultrasound showed improved (n = 9) or stable hydronephrosis (n = 1). At a median follow-up of 19.73 months (IQR 4.27, 38.32), no patient required an unplanned secondary intervention. Robotic upper urinary tract surgery is feasible and safe in patients ≤ 6 months of age and can be performed successfully with the same technique as for older children.

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Urachal Excision Using Hidden Incision Endoscopic Surgery Technique in Pediatric Patients

Introduction: Although laparoscopic urachal excision in children has been well reported, there are limited data on a robot-assisted surgery (RAS) approach. The hidden incision endoscopic surgery (HIdES) technique is an established method of eliminating visible scars following a number of RAS urologic procedures. We report our experience of using a robotic approach to treat urachal anomalies in children, and we present the first description of utilizing the HIdES port configuration for this procedure. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed pediatric patients who underwent resection of a urachal remnant at our institution from 2013 to 2018. Surgical techniques were either the traditional open approach (OA) or RAS. HIdES trocar placement configuration was employed in all robotic cases. Patient demographics, perioperative data, pathology reports, and outcomes were abstracted and compared. Results: Twenty-three patients underwent a urachal remnant resection in the study period (RAS: 14 patients vs OA: 9 patients). RAS patients were older (8.5 vs 2.0 years, p = 0.031) and weighed more than OA patients (36.1 vs 13.9 kg, p = 0.063). Median operative time for RAS was longer than OA operative time (136 vs 33 minutes, p < 0.01). Fewer RAS patients were outpatient compared with OA (7.1% vs 66.7%, p < 0.01), but with a median length of stay of 1 day (0-1 day). Two patients (14.3%) in the RAS group experienced postoperative complications within 1 week of the procedure compared with 1 (11.1%) in the OA group. There was no significant difference in blood loss, postoperative narcotic requirements, or duration of follow-up between both groups. Conclusion: RAS is a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery for urachal anomalies. Complete excision can be achieved by using HIdES port configuration, allowing for excellent cosmetic outcomes that are superior to traditional surgical scars without limitation to essential surgical ergonomics.

Current Concepts in Pediatric Robotic Assisted Pyeloplasty

Robotic surgery in pediatric urology has been gaining popularity since its introduction almost two decades ago. Robotic assisted pyeloplasty is the most common robotic procedure performed in pediatric urology. Advances in robotic technology, instrumentation, patient care and surgical expertise have allowed the correction of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction in most patients using this minimally invasive technique. The excellent experience with robotic assisted pyeloplasty has challenged other approaches as a new standard for the treatment of UPJ obstruction. In this review, we will describe the technique as it relates to the different robotic platforms, review the surgical experience and compare its results to other surgical approaches. Also, we will discuss patient and parent satisfaction, cost and financial considerations, along with evaluating the future of robotic surgery in the treatment of UPJ obstruction.

Robotic Assisted Surgery in Pediatric Urology: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of robotic surgical technology and its application in Pediatric Urology have been rapid and essentially successful. Further development remains limited in three key areas: procedural inefficiencies, cost and integration of surgical and clinical information. By addressing these challenges through technology and novel surgical paradigms, the real potential of surgical robotics in pediatric, as well as adult applications, may ultimately be realized. With this evolution, a continued focus on patient-centered outcomes will be essential to provide optimal guidance to technical innovations.

Single-Site Laparoscopy and Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we summarize research that has evaluated the role of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) and robotic surgery in pediatric urology, highlighting new and/or controversial ideas.

RECENT FINDINGS

The newest research developments over the last several years are studies that address generalizability of these techniques, ideal patient factors, extrapolation to more complex surgeries, and comparative studies to more traditional techniques to define the associated costs and benefits, as well as patient-centered outcomes. Specifically in the field of LESS, addressing the limitations of suboptimal vision, instrument crowding, and loss of triangulation have been a focus. The literature is now replete with new applications for robotic surgery as well as descriptions of the specific technical challenges inherent to pediatrics. Robotic surgery and LESS are areas of growth in pediatric urology that allow continual innovation and expansion of technology within a surgeon's armamentarium.