Robotic Versus Open Kidney Transplantation from Deceased Donors: A Prospective Observational Study

The incidence and classification of intraoperative adverse events in urological surgery: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review (SR) to examine the application of classification systems (CS) used to report intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) in urological surgery and to evaluate the crude incidence and type of iAEs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review was published via PROSPERO (CRD42024549954) and conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane CENTRAL were searched using a predefined PICO framework: (P) patients with benign and malignant urological diseases, (I) all types of urological surgery, (C) none/any, (O) intraoperative complications classified with grading systems. Retrospective and prospective studies published between January 2019 and June 2024 were included.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1,570 abstracts, 1,043 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, of which 325 studies reported iAEs (54 used iAE-CS, 64 used Clavien-Dindo Classification and 207 used free-text descriptions). Of the 54 studies (15,298 patients) that used an iAE-CS, the three most used systems were the EAUiaiC (54%), SATAVA (26%), and the modified SATAVA (7%). The overall incidence of iAE was 14% (2,153/15,225 patients). On a study level, the crude incidence of iAE was between 0 and 100% (median 7%, IQR: 3-13%). The misapplication of the Clavien-Dindo system to describe iAEs was high (n = 64 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of iAE-CS is scarce, and there is a lack of universal consensus on a CS to describe iAEs. iAE are poorly reported in urological studies. Urologists should report all perioperative complications to improve transparency and surgical and hospital processes.

Robot-assisted Kidney Transplantation: The 8-year European Experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Evidence regarding perioperative results and long-term functional outcomes of robotic-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is limited. We evaluated perioperative surgical results and long-term functional outcomes of RAKT in patients receiving kidney transplants from living donors.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis is based on a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted from July 2015 to October 2023 across ten European centers. A total of 624 patients who underwent heterotopic RAKT from living donors were included, excluding those who received orthotopic RAKT. The primary outcomes measured were long-term renal function, perioperative complications, and survival rates. Renal function was assessed with the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) was used to describe early (within 30 d) and late (from 31 to 90 d) postoperative complications. The probabilities of dialysis, graft nephrectomies, and any-cause mortality during follow-up were reported in terms of the 5-yr cumulative incidence.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 624 patients with a median age of 35 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 26-52) underwent RAKT. Preemptive RAKT was performed in 52% of cases, and the majority (84%) had the transplant in the right iliac fossa. The median operative time was 210 min (IQR: 180-262), with a rewarming time of 43 min (IQR: 38-50). Intraoperative complications were rare (1.1%), and postoperative graft nephrectomy occurred in 1.9% of patients. High-grade (CDC grade ≥3) early and late postoperative complications were observed in 7.7% and 2.3% of patients, respectively. Rates of incisional hernias, ureteral stenosis, and arterial stenosis were 1.4%, 1.1%, and 0.2%, respectively. The median eGFR values were 19, 52, and 53 ml/min/1.73 m2 on the 1st postoperative day, on the 7th postoperative day, and at 6 mo, respectively. Over a median follow-up of 23 mo (IQR: 6-49), 17 patients received dialysis, 11 patients underwent graft nephrectomy, and four patients died. None of the deaths were due to RAKT. The main limitation is the absence of a comparator group.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

With the largest experience worldwide on RAKT, we confirm the perioperative safety and excellent long-term functional outcomes of this procedure. Given the benefits of a minimally invasive robotic approach, these findings support the broader adoption of RAKT as a viable option for kidney transplantation.

Introducing robot-assisted kidney transplantation in a high-volume centre in Denmark: a pilot and feasibility study

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) may reduce surgical complications compared to open kidney transplantation (OKT), but no randomised trials have explored this to date. The aim of the present study is to explore the feasibility of introducing RAKT at our institution, making it available in deceased donor transplantation and evaluate early surgical outcomes prior to performing a randomised trial comparing RAKT to OKT. RAKT was performed at Department of Urology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. The patients were included from June 2022 until May 2023. The data were collected through the national electronic health records. The data include recipient, donor and intraoperative characteristics, postoperative complications within 90 days graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification and days alive and out of hospital (DAOH). The functional outcomes include eGFR, plasma creatinine, delayed graft function, and rejection episodes. Sixteen RAKTs were performed. Fourteen cases were transplantations with living donors and two cases were with deceased donors. There were no major intra-operative adverse events and no conversions. The median operative time was 223 min and median blood loss 150 ml. The median length of stay was 7 days and median DAOH was 82. Seven complications occurred in five patients at 90 days postoperatively; however, there were no major surgical complications. This study comprehensively assesses patient morbidity following RAKT in a small cohort with results indicating favourable outcomes. This supported our clinical assumption of reduced complications for a randomised trial comparing OKT and RAKT (the ORAKTx trial) which has been initiated (NCT identifier 05730257).

Robotic kidney transplant has superior outcomes compared to open kidney transplant: results of a propensity match analysis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have demonstrated the feasibility of robotic kidney transplant (RKT) as a safe alternative to open kidney transplant (OKT). However, significant selection bias in RKT patient selection limits meaningful comparison between the two techniques.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective review of a prospectively maintained kidney transplant database (2021-2024). Outcomes after the first 50 "non-selected" RKTs are compared with a contemporary cohort of 100 OKTs after propensity score matching for age, gender, BMI and type of donation (living vs deceased). Data pertinent to recipient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and short-term post-operative outcomes were collected and compared.

RESULTS

Both groups were well-matched for recipient age, gender, BMI, and donation type. RKT group had significantly longer total operative time (RKT 258 min vs. OKT 183 min; p < 0.0001) and warm ischemia time (RKT 37 min vs. OKT 31 min; p < 0.0001) but significantly less blood loss (OKT 155 ml vs. RKT 93 ml). Average length of hospital stay for both groups was 5 days, with OKT group demonstrating significantly higher rates of post-operative complications (OKT 31% vs. RKT 14%; p = 0.028), return to OR (OKT 15% vs. RKT 2%; p = 0.021), hematoma (OKT 13% vs. RKT 2%; p = 0.0355), and lymphocele (OKT 25% vs. RKT 6%; p = 0.0039). OKT group also had higher 30-day readmission rate (OKT 31% vs. RKT 14%) and post-operative opioid requirement (OKT 93 MME vs. RKT 65; p = 0.0254). There were no differences in rates of wound infection, urine leaks, delayed graft function, acute rejection, graft loss, and patient death between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RKT is a safe and viable alternative to OKT as a first-choice procedure for all patients with ESRD. RKT offers many advantages over OKT which can lead to its wider adoption in the coming years as the new standard of care for ESRD patients.

[Germany's first robot-assisted kidney transplantation from a deceased donor: a good option in obese recipients-with the right team]

Robot-assisted kidney transplantations have been performed in Europe since 2015. In Germany, the technique is slowly spreading - most recently, 3 urological centers performed this type of procedure. We present the first case of a post-mortem, robot-assisted kidney transplantation in Germany in a 60-year-old patient. In addition to the surgical technique and the clinical course, the opportunities of this surgical technique and its challenges are discussed in particular. In summary, the experience at our center is consistent with the findings from the literature that robot-assisted post-mortem kidney transplantation is a safe method for supplementing the principles of open transplantation surgery with the advantages of minimally invasive methods.

Robotic kidney transplantation

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease owing to improved survival and quality of life compared with dialysis. The surgical approach to kidney transplantation has been somewhat stagnant in the past 50 years, with the open approach being the only available option. In this scenario, evidence of reduced surgery-related morbidity after the introduction of robotics into several surgical fields has induced surgeons to consider robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) as an alternative approach to these fragile and immunocompromised patients. Since 2014, when the RAKT technique was standardized thanks to the pioneering collaboration between the Vattikuti Urology Institute and the Medanta hospital (Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta), several centres worldwide implemented RAKT programmes, providing interesting results regarding the safety and feasibility of this procedure. However, RAKT is still considered an alternative procedure to be offered mainly in the living donor setting, owing to various possible drawbacks such as prolonged rewarming time, demanding learning curve, and difficulties in carrying out this procedure in challenging scenarios (such as patients with obesity, severe atherosclerosis of the iliac vessels, deceased donor setting, or paediatric recipients). Nevertheless, the refinement of robotic platforms through the implementation of novel technologies as well as the encouraging results from multicentre collaborations under the umbrella of the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section are currently expanding the boundaries of RAKT, making this surgical procedure a real alternative to the open approach.

Access to robotic assisted kidney transplant for recipients: a systematic review and call for reporting standards

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is a relatively novel, minimally invasive option for kidney transplantation. However, clarity on recipient selection in the published literature is lacking thereby significantly limiting interpretation of safety and other outcomes. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesize the data on selection of RAKT recipients, compare the synthesized data to kidney transplant recipients across the USA, and explore geographical clusters of availability of RAKT. Systematic literature review, in accordance with PRISMA, via OVID MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of science from inception to March 5, 2023. All data entry double blinded and quality via Newcastle Ottawa Scale. 44 full-text articles included, encompassing approximately 2402 kidney transplant recipients at baseline but with considerable suspicion for overlap across publications. There were significant omissions of information across studies on patient selection for RAKT and/or analysis. Overall, the quality of studies was very low. Given suspicion of overlap across studies, it is difficult to determine how many RAKT recipients received living (LD) versus deceased donor (DD) organs, but a rough estimate suggests 89% received LD. While the current RAKT literature provides preliminary evidence on safety, there are significant omissions in reporting on patient selection for RAKT which limits interpretation of findings. Two recommendations: (1) international consensus is needed for reporting guidelines when publishing RAKT data and (2) larger controlled trials consistently reporting recipient characteristics are needed to clearly determine selection, safety, and outcomes across both LD and DD recipients.

The ERUS course on robot-assisted kidney transplantation

PURPOSE

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is being increasingly performed at selected referral institutions worldwide. Yet, surgical training in RAKT is still unstructured and not grounded into formal credentialing courses including simulation, lab facilities, and modular training with animal models. As such, developing standardized, modular training programs is warranted to provide surgeons with the RAKT-specific skillset needed for a "safe" learning curve.

METHODS

The 3-day course on RAKT developed at the EAU Skills Center in Orsi Academy was designed as a standardized, modular, step-by-step approach aiming to provide theoretical and practical skills. The course is held by expert proctors with extensive experience in RAKT. To maximize the course's usefulness, a solid knowledge of robotics and transplantation is desirable for participants.

RESULTS

From January 2016 to July 2023, 87 surgeons from 23 countries (of which 36% from extra-European countries) participated in the RAKT course performed at the EAU Skills Center in Orsi Academy. Of these, 58/87 (67%) were urologists, while 27/87 (31%) were general surgeons and 2/87 (2%) were vascular surgeons. To date, 18 participants (20.6%) are actively involved in RAKT programs at institutions included in the European Association of Urology (EAU) Robotic Urology Section (ERUS)-RAKT network.

CONCLUSION

Leveraging the potential of simulation, wet-lab training, live porcine models, and experienced proctors, the RAKT course performed at the EAU Skills Center in Orsi Academy represents the first structured teaching effort aiming to offer surgeons a full immersion in RAKT to train the core technical skills.

Proposal of a standardized training curriculum for open and robot-assisted kidney transplantation

Standardized training programs for open (OKT) and robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) remain unmet clinical needs. To fill this gap, we designed a modified Delphi Consensus aiming to propose the first structured surgical curricula for both OKT and RAKT, involving a multispecialty international panel of experts. Two web-based surveys were built drafting two separate series of statements (for OKT and RAKT, respectively). The two surveys were delivered to a panel of 63 experts (for OKT) and 21 experts (for RAKT), selected considering their experience, academic profile and involvement in international associations. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement between the responders. Overall, 25/63 (40%) and 14/21 (67%) participated in the first round of the Delphi Consensus for the development of the structured curriculum for OKT and RAKT, respectively. During the second round, the experts reached consensus on all statements, as well as on the domains composing the structure of the training pathway: 1) eligibility criteria for trainees and host centres; 2) theoretical training; 3) simulation; 4) real case observation; and 5) modular training in the operating theatre. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first proposal of a dedicated curriculum for OKT and RAKT grounded on insights from international experts of different specialties. Our proposed curriculum provides the foundation to standardize the education and training in KT across Europe and beyond.

Trends in kidney transplantation and living donor nephrectomy in Germany: a total population analysis from 2006 to 2021

PURPOSE

To analyze recent trends of surgical access routes, length of hospital stay (LOS), and mortality in kidney transplantation (KT) and living donor nephrectomy (LDN) in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied the nationwide German hospital billing database and the German hospital quality reports from 2006 to 2021.

RESULTS

There were a total of 35.898 KTs. In total, 9044 (25%) were living donor transplantations, while 26.854 (75%) were transplantations after donation after brain death (DBD). The share of open LDN decreased from 82% in 2006 to 22% in 2020 (- 4%/year; p < 0.001). The share of laparoscopic LDN increased from 18% in 2006 to 70% in 2020 (+ 3%/year; p < 0.001). The share of robotic LDN increased from 0% in 2006 to 8% in 2020 (+ 0.6%/year; p < 0.001). Robotic-assisted KT increased from 5 cases in 2016 to 13 procedures in 2019 (p = 0.2). LOS was shorter after living donor KT, i.e., 18 ± 12.1 days versus 21 ± 19.6 days for DBD renal transplantation (p < 0.001). Moreover, LOS differed for open versus laparoscopic versus robotic LDN (9 ± 3.1 vs. 8 ± 2.9 vs. 6 ± 2.6; p = 0.031). The overall in-hospital mortality was 0.16% (n = 5) after LDN, 0.47% (n = 42) after living donor KT and 1.8% (n = 475) after DBD KT.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increasing trend toward minimal-invasive LDN in recent years. Overall, in-hospital mortality was low after KT. However, 5 deceased healthy donors after LKD caution that the risks of this procedure should also be taken very seriously.

Open versus robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: A systematic review by the European Association of Urology (EAU) - Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Kidney Transplant Working Group

INTRODUCTION

In the last 20 years, robotic assisted procedures were evaluated in the field of kidney transplantation to provide a mini-invasive approach for this particularly fragile population. As a relatively new issue, few studies compared open kidney transplantation (OKT) and robotic-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT), mostly in small cohorts. To improve current knowledge, we wanted here to gather comparative data of OKT vs RAKT in a systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify all studies reporting post-operative outcomes of RAKT versus OKT.

RESULTS

A total of 2136 patients in 13 studies were included. Median recipient age was 42.6 years (OKT: 43.5 years and RAKT: 40.3 years). Median preemptive kidney transplantation rate was 27.1 % (OKT: 23.3 % and RAKT: 33.2 %). Median total operative time and rewarming were respectively: 235 and 49 min in OKT population; 250 and 60 min in RAKT population. Post-operative complications rates were: 26.2 % in OKT population and 17.8 % in RAKT population. Delayed graft function rates were: 4.9 % in OKT population and 2.3 in RAKT population. Mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival were similar in OKT and RAKT population.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review showed that RAKT may be associated with a lower incidence of delayed graft function and post-operative surgical complications and similar mid-term functional outcomes, patient and graft survival, compared to OKT for end-stage renal disease patients.

The First Entirely 3D-Printed Training Model for Robot-assisted Kidney Transplantation: The RAKT Box

Background

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is increasingly performed at selected referral institutions worldwide. However, simulation and proficiency-based progression training frameworks for RAKT are still lacking, making acquisition of the RAKT-specific skill set a critical unmet need for future RAKT surgeons.

Objective

To develop and test the RAKT Box, the first entirely 3D-printed, perfused, hyperaccuracy simulator for vascular anastomoses during RAKT.

Design setting and participants

The project was developed in a stepwise fashion by a multidisciplinary team including urologists and bioengineers via an iterative process over a 3-yr period (November 2019-November 2022) using an established methodology. The essential and time-sensitive steps of RAKT were selected by a team of RAKT experts and simulated using the RAKT Box according to the principles of the Vattituki-Medanta technique. The RAKT Box was tested in the operating theatre by an expert RAKT surgeon and independently by four trainees with heterogeneous expertise in robotic surgery and kidney transplantation.

Surgical procedure

Simulation of RAKT.

Measurements

Video recordings of the trainees' performance of vascular anastomoses using the RAKT Box were evaluated blind by a senior surgeon according to the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) and Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS) tools.

Results and limitations

All participants successfully completed the training session, confirming the technical reliability of the RAKT Box simulator. Tangible differences were observed among the trainees in both anastomosis time and performance metrics. Key limitations of the RAKT Box include lack of simulation of the ureterovesical anastomosis and the need for a robotic platform, specific training instruments, and disposable 3D-printed vessels.

Conclusions

The RAKT Box is a reliable educational tool to train novice surgeons in the key steps of RAKT and may represent the first step toward the definition of a structured surgical curriculum in RAKT.

Patient summary

We describe the first entirely 3D-printed simulator that allows surgeons to test the key steps of robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) in a training environment before performing the procedure in patients. The simulator, called the RAKT Box, has been successfully tested by an expert surgeon and four trainees. The results confirm its reliability and potential as an educational tool for training of future RAKT surgeons.

Comparison of outcomes after open versus robotic kidney transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

This meta-analysis compares the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted kidney transplant (RAKT) to open kidney transplant (OKT).

Methods

A systematic search of Scopus and MEDLINE databases was carried out using a combination of keywords to identify studies comparing RAKT to OKT. Baseline characteristics and preoperative and postoperative data were collected along with data on the short- and long-term outcomes. The study was registered in PROSPERO and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

Results

A total of 16 studies were included with a total of 2555 patients, of which 677 underwent RAKT and 1878 underwent OKT. This meta-analysis shows a significant benefit of RAKT over OKT in terms of less intra-operative blood loss, smaller incision length, less postoperative pain scores at 24 and 48 hours, and a lower incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs), especially in obese patients. In addition, the incidence of postoperative lymphoceles was lower in the RAKT group compared to the OKT group, although not statistically significant. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of short-term graft functional outcomes and overall survival. The number of deceased donor recipients undergoing RAKT was very small. At the time of reporting this meta-analysis, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) had been published.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that RAKT is a safe and feasible alternative to OKT, especially in obese individuals. Further trials are needed to confirm the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of RAKT.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation from uncontrolled donors after circulatory death vs. expanded-criteria or standard-criteria donors after brain death at an Italian Academic Center: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The use of kidneys from "expanded criteria" donors after brain death (ECD) and uncontrolled donors after circulatory death (uDCD) has been warranted to increase the pool of donors for kidney transplantation (KT). However, there is lack of evidence on the feasibility and safety of KT from such donors in the Italian setting.

METHODS

We queried our prospectively KT database to select patients undergoing KT from deceased donors (uDCDs, ECDs, and standard-criteria donors [SCD] after brain death) from January 2017 to December 2020, comparing the perioperative and mid-term functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 172 KTs were included. The donor's profile was different among the study groups, while recipients' characteristics were similar expect for median age. Grafts from uDCDs and ECDs had longer median cold ischemia times as compared to grafts from SCDs. The proportion of patients experiencing DGF, the median hospitalization, as well as the overall and major complications rate, were significantly higher among recipients from uDCDs. The proportion of patients needing dialysis at last follow-up was significantly higher among recipients from uDCDs (33.3% vs. 8.5% vs. 5.4%, P<0.001). However, the median eGFR at the last follow-up was lower for recipients from ECDs compared to those from uDCDs and SCDs, respectively (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

While "marginal" donors represent a relevant source of organs, KTs from uDCDs carry higher risks of major surgical complications, DGF, and worse graft survival as compared to KT from both ECDs and SCDs. As such, the use of grafts from uDCDs should be carefully assessed balancing the potential benefits with the risk of primary no function and the subsequent immunological sensitization.

Prospective comparison of suture ligation and electrothermal sealing for the control of perivascular lymphatics in kidney transplant recipients

Background

The use of sutures as ligatures has proven to be safe and reliable for the control of lymphatic vessels. The electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer (EBVS) is a relatively new type of device that can be used to seal lymphatics. We conducted a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EBVS for preparation of the recipient vessel during renal transplantation.

Methods

In this prospective randomized controlled study, EBVS (Medtronic) was compared with conventional ligature for the control of perivascular lymphatics in kidney transplant recipients. A total of 52 kidney transplant recipients were randomly assigned to two groups. In group 1, EBVS was used to control perivascular lymphatics, while conventional silk ligatures were used in group 2. Demographic characteristics, as well as preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative variables, were noted and compared between the groups.

Results

The mean recipient vessel preparation time was 8.3±1.9 minutes in group 1 and 14.5±4 minutes in group 2 (P<0.001). The mean anastomosis time was 28.2±5.4 minutes in group 1 and 28.2±4.2 minutes in group 2 (P=1.000). The mean estimated blood loss was 101.54±44.60 mL in group 1 and 125.19±74.17 mL in group 2 (P=0.270), and the mean drain output was 51.42 mL per day and 57.50 mL per day in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P=0.590).

Conclusions

EBVS can be employed safely and effectively for recipient iliac lymphatic vessel dissection and sealing. EBVS is a fast, secure, and effective choice to permanently fuse the vessels and is a good option to avoid posttransplant lymphatic complications.

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: Is it getting ready for prime time?

Kidney transplantation (KT) is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease, providing a better survival rate and quality of life compared to dialysis. Despite the progress in the medical management of KT patients, from a purely surgical standpoint, KT has resisted innovations during the last 50 years. Recently, robot-assisted KT (RAKT) has been proposed as an alternative approach to open surgery, especially due to its potential benefits for fragile and immunocompromised recipients. It was not until 2014 that the role of RAKT has found value thanks to the pioneering Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta collaboration that conceptualized and developed a new surgical technique for RAKT following the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up recommendations for introducing surgical innovations into real-life practice. During the last years, mirroring the Vattikuti-Medanta technique, several centers developed RAKT program worldwide, providing strong evidence about the safety and the feasibility of this procedure. However, the majority of RAKT are still performed in the living donor setting, as an “eligible” procedure, while only a few centers have realized KT through a robotic approach in the challenging scenario of cadaver donation. In addition, despite the spread of minimally-invasive (predominantly robotic) surgery worldwide, many KTs are still performed in an open fashion. Regardless of the type of incision employed by surgeons, open KT may lead to non-negligible risks of wound complications, especially among obese patients. Particularly, the assessment for KT should consider not only the added surgical technical challenges but also the higher risk of postoperative complications. In this context, robotic surgery could offer several benefits, including providing a better exposure of the surgical field and better instrument maneuverability, as well as the possibility to integrate other technological nuances, such as the use of intraoperative fluorescence vascular imaging with indocyanine green to assess the ureteral vascularization before the uretero-vesical anastomosis. Therefore, our review aims to report the more significant experiences regarding RAKT, focusing on the results and future perspectives.