Toward Improving Transurethral Prostate Surgery: Development and Initial Experiments with a Prototype Concentric Tube Robotic Platform

A Survey of Transoral Robotic Mechanisms: Distal Dexterity, Variable Stiffness, and Triangulation

Robot-assisted technologies are being investigated to overcome the limitations of the current solutions for transoral surgeries, which suffer from constrained insertion ports, lengthy and indirect passageways, and narrow anatomical structures. This paper reviews distal dexterity mechanisms, variable stiffness mechanisms, and triangulation mechanisms, which are closely related to the specific technical challenges of transoral robotic surgery (TORS). According to the structure features in moving and orienting end effectors, the distal dexterity designs can be classified into 4 categories: serial mechanism, continuum mechanism, parallel mechanism, and hybrid mechanism. To ensure adequate adaptability, conformability, and safety, surgical robots must have high flexibility, which can be achieved by varying the stiffness. Variable stiffness (VS) mechanisms based on their working principles in TORS include phase-transition-based VS mechanism, jamming-based VS mechanism, and structure-based VS mechanism. Triangulations aim to obtain enough workspace and create adequate traction and counter traction for various operations, including visualization, retraction, dissection, and suturing, with independently controllable manipulators. The merits and demerits of these designs are discussed to provide a reference for developing new surgical robotic systems (SRSs) capable of overcoming the limitations of existing systems and addressing challenges imposed by TORS procedures.

Comparison of effectiveness and postoperative complications of different surgical methods in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Background

More and more new surgical procedures for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) are proposed creatively. However, the existing clinical evidence shows that the effectiveness and safety of various procedures exist inconsistent.

Methods

The randomized controlled trials comparing the international prostate score, length of hospital stay, maximum urinary flow rate, operation time, and complication rates of prostatic artery embolization (PAE), Greenlight-XPS Laser prostate vaporization procedure (GLL PVP), diode laser enucleation of prostate (DILEP) and plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with BPH were screened out in databases. The primary outcome was pooled using a restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effect model and inverse variance-based fixed-effect model. Cochrane Q statistics and I2 statistics were computed to quantify between-study heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Results

This meta-analysis ultimately included 14 original research papers, with 1,940 participants enrolled. Eight studies were considered to be at moderate risk of bias, while the others were at mild risk of bias. Although the improvement in functional outcome of the DILEP procedure was equivalent to that of the PKRP procedure, the DILEP procedure group had fewer hospital stays than the PKRP group (P=0.01). In addition, even though the performance of the GLL PVP procedure in the improvement of functional outcome was inferior to the counterpart of TURP (P=0.64), it had a much fewer hospital stays (P=0.01). Moreover, there is still insufficient evidence for the improvement of subjective functional indicators of postoperative patients with PAE compared with TURP [international prostate symptom score (IPSS): P=0.73; IPSS QoL: P=0.91], but achieved less satisfactory objective functional outcomes (Qmax: P=0.06; PVR: P=0.00).

Discussion

New surgical procedures such as GLL PVP, PAE, and DILEP were safer than traditional TURP procedures. However, it is not superior to traditional surgery in the improvement of clinical symptoms. In clinical practice, the pros and cons of the new operation and the traditional operation should be carefully weighed, and the operation that is most suitable for the patient's condition should be selected.

Modified bedside twist drill craniostomy for evacuation of chronic subdural haematoma

Introduction

Standard craniotomy (SC) and burr hole craniostomy (BHC) are regarded as the standard approaches to chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH). Bedside twist drill craniostomy (TDC), performed at the patient’s bedside, was introduced as an alternative to the standard methods. However, clinical and radiological features of patients treated with TDC and BHC/SC have not been compared.

Aim

To demonstrate the specific features of CSDH that affect the surgeons’ preferences when selecting patients for TDC.

Material and methods

A retrospective analysis of 32 patients treated due to CSDH in the year 2017 at a single institution was performed. Baseline radiological characteristics, clinical status at admission, complication rate and clinical outcomes were compared between BHC/SC and TDC.

Results

Of the 32 patients, 5 (15.6%) were treated using TDC and 27 (84.4%) by SC or BHC. The duration of the TDC procedure was significantly shorter than the time of standard therapies (p < 0.01). There were no differences between TDC and BHC/SC in terms of baseline clinical characteristics, including age, gender, head trauma history, diabetes, hypertension, antiplatelet drug use, clinical manifestation and the Glasgow Coma Scale score (all p > 0.05). Patients treated with TDC had a significantly thicker haematoma (TDC vs. BHC/SC: mean 25.3 mm vs. 14.6 mm) (p < 0.01) and demonstrated a smaller midline shift (TDC vs. BHC/SC: mean 0.5 mm vs. 4.0 mm) (p = 0.01) compared to those treated with BHC/SC.

Conclusions

Twist drill craniostomy is a more effective method for CSDH evacuation compared to SC and BHC. This procedure is considered as the first line treatment for patients with a thicker and non-septated haematoma, and with a smaller midline shift.