Robotic Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Is Safe but Faces Technical Challenges

Single-port robotic versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Previous studies have compared single-port robotic cholecystectomy (SPRC) to single-incision laparoscopic (SILC). However, there is not a systematic review and meta-analysis in patient with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 even though higher BMI is a risk factor for gallstone disease, a common indication for cholecystectomy. PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched for related literature. Studies and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Inverse variances weighted mean differences (WMD) with random effects model were used for continues values and odds ratios (OR) with random effects model using the Mantel-Haenszel's formula were used for dichotomous value. Heterogeneity using Higgins I2 and p values were calculated. Sensitivity analysis was performed for operative duration and intraoperative complications. In this meta-analysis, six studies involving a total of 734 patients examined SPRC and SILC. The analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in operative duration for SPRC compared to SILC, with a weighted mean difference of 26.67 min (95% CI 14.99, 38.34; I2 = 93%; Pheterogeneity < 0.00001; Poverall < 0.00001). Regarding conversion to multi-port cholecystectomy (MC), no statistically significant difference was found, yielding an odds ratio of 0.94 (95% CI 0.36, 2.45; I2 = 0%; Pheterogeneity = 0.78; Poverall = 0.89). Intra-operative blood loss showed non-significant differences, with a weighted mean difference of - 16.76 ml (95% CI - 48.56, 15.03; I2 = 78%; Pheterogeneity = 0.03; Poverall = 0.30). Length of hospitalization was significantly reduced by approximately half a day for SPRC compared to SILC, with a weighted mean difference of - 0.52 days (95% CI - 0.89, - 0.14; I2 = 0%; Pheterogeneity = 0.52; Poverall = 0.007). Intra-operative complications did not differ significantly between the techniques, resulting in an odds ratio of 0.59 (95% CI 0.19, 1.81; I2 = 70%; Pheterogeneity = 0.04; Poverall = 0.36). Finally, two studies evaluated bile leak rates, concluding no significant difference with an odds ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.39, 1.88; I2 = 23%; Pheterogeneity = 0.25; Poverall = 0.70). Sensitivity analyses indicated that no single study unduly influenced the results for operative duration, while one study was identified as a source of heterogeneity in intra-operative complications. SPRC is associated with longer operative duration, but shorter length of hospitalization in patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, compared to laparoscopic. Future studies should aim to examine incisional hernias rates as well as determine the long-term outcomes. PROSPERO registration: CRD42024602514.

Clinical status and future prospects of single-incision robotic-assisted surgery: a review

Since the advent of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery, the prosperity of minimally invasive surgery has been thriving on the advancement of endoscopic techniques. Cosmetic superiority, recovery benefits, and noninferior surgical outcomes weigh single-incision laparoscopic surgery as a promising modality. Although there are surgical challenges posed by steep learning curve and technological difficulties, such as instruments collision, triangulation loss and limited retraction, the establishment of robotic surgical platform as a solution to all is inspiring. Furthermore, with enhanced instrument maneuverability and stability, robotic ergonomic innovations adopt the advantages of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and surmount its recognized barriers by introducing a novel combination, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery. As was gradually diffused in general surgery and other specialties, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery manifests privileges in noninferior clinical outcomes an satisfactory cosmetic effect among strictly selected patients, and has the potential of a preferable surgical option for minimally invasive surgery.

Low Risk of Postoperative Hernia Following Single-port Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Report From the Single-port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk of postoperative hernia following different approaches of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent SP-RARP between February 2019 and December 2022. Demographic and clinical information was collected from the multi-institutional, prospectively-maintained Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC) database. Data were analyzed using IBM Statistical Packaging for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0 with descriptive statistics as presented.

RESULTS

A total of 1103 patients were identified, consisting of 244 (22.1%), 712 (64.6%), and 147 (13.3%) cases performed via transperitoneal, extraperitoneal (EP), and transvesical (TV) approaches, respectively. During a median follow-up time of 11 months (interquartile range 5.7-17.1 months), only two cases of incisional hernia were reported. Both cases occurred following transperitoneal SP-RARP with one patient requiring surgical repair. There remains no evidence of postoperative hernia following EP and TV SP-RARP at the completion of our review.

CONCLUSION

SP-RARP was associated with low risk for postoperative hernia. The risk was lower following TV and EP SP-RARP where the peritoneum is preserved.

Single-site robotic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The possibilities of minimally invasive cholecystectomy have emerged since the beginning of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC). This study aimed to compare the feasibility, safety, and pain scores between SSRC and SILC.

Methods

The authors searched randomized or non-randomized controlled trials and observational studies in PubMed, EuroPMC, and ClinicalTrials.gov from April 2012 until April 2022. The authors analyzed the operation time, hospital stay, blood loss volume, conversion rate, intraoperative complication rates, postoperative complications, visual analog scale (VAS) immediately after surgery, and VAS at hospital discharge. This study aligned with PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines.

Results

Thirteen studies were selected with 817 and 757 patients who underwent SSRC and SILC. Thus, this study demonstrated a lower incidence of intraoperative complication rates [relative risk (RR) 0.57 (95% CI 0.34-0.96), p = 0.03] and lesser VAS score at hospital discharge [Std. Mean Difference (SMD) -0.23 (95% CI -0.46, -0.01), p = 0.04] in the SSRC group. Regarding operation time and cost, SSRC revealed a longer time [SMD 1.02 (95% CI 0.45, 1.59), p = 0.0004] and higher cost [SMD 4.18 (95% CI 1.77, 6.58), p < 0.00001], respectively. Meanwhile, SSRC did not differ from SILC during a hospital stay, blood loss volume, conversion rate, postoperative complication rates, and VAS immediately after surgery.

Conclusions

Concerning intraoperative complication rates and VAS score at hospital discharge, SSRC was superior to SILC. Thus, SSRC is considered a feasible and safe procedure.

Outcome after single-site robotic cholecystectomy: An initial single center's experience

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard for symptomatic gallbladder disease, a single-incision approach may be a new challenge in order to achieve minimization of surgical trauma. Single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC) is able to offset the ergonomic limitation of laparoscopic single-site cholecystectomy and improves cosmesis.

METHODS

We present a single-institution initial experience of SSRC for cholecystolithiasis. Intra-operative and post-operative data of patients were reviewed to assess the technical feasibility and cosmetic outcome.

RESULTS

We evaluated a series of 27 consecutive patients retrospectively analyzed and prospectively collected who underwent SSRC. One patient was excluded from the final analysis because they converted to open procedure. The female/male ratio was 17/9, with mean age of 48 ± 12 years. The body mass index mean value was 26.0 ± 4.2. The mean operative time was 99.6 ± 21.5 minutes. No intra- or post-operative complications and readmissions were recorded. At 12 months follow up, every patient received the Body Image Questionnaire (BIQ) and a Photo Series Questionnaire. We recorded three patients (11.5%) with post-operative incisional hernia. Scores of the BIQ subscale for body image perception were 6 ± 1.2, while the scores of scar cosmesis were 21.1 ± 3.0. A statistically significant improvement in scar self-rating from T0 to T1 (P < .01) was found.

CONCLUSION

In our initial experience SSRC may be preferred to treat patients with higher needs in terms of cosmesis and body image perception. Lower costs for rent, maintenance and consumables may allow the spread of robotic surgery also for singe site cholecystectomy.

Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review

The role of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) is still unclear. We update the summarization of the feasibility and safety of SILC and SIRC. A comprehensive search of SILC and SIRC of English literature published on PubMed database between January 2015 and November 2020 was performed. A total of 70 articles were included: 41 covering SILC alone, 21 showing SIRC alone, 7 reporting both, and 1 study not specified. In total, 7828 cases were recorded (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 6234/1544/50); and the gender of 7423 cases was definitively reported: the female rate was 64.0% (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 62.1%/71.5%/74.0%). The weighted mean for body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss and post-operative hospital stay was 25.5 kg/m² (SILC/SIRC, 25.0/27.0 kg/m²), 73.8 min (SILC/SIRC, 68.2/88.8 min), 12.6 mL (SILC/SIRC, 12.1/14.8 mL) and 2.5 days (SILC/SIRC, 2.8/1.9 days), respectively. The pooled prevalence of an additional port, conversion to open surgery, post-operative complications, intraoperative biliary injury, and incisional hernia was 4.1% (SILC/SIRC, 4.7%/1.9%), 0.9% (SILC/SIRC, 0.7%/1.5%), 5.9% (SILC/SIRC, 6.2%/4.1%), 0.1% (SILC/SIRC, 0.2%/0.09%), and 2.1% (SILC/SIRC, 1.4%/4.8%), respectively. Compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SIRC has experienced more postoperative incisional hernias (risk difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.07; P < 0.0001). By far, SILC and SIRC have not been considered a standard procedure. With the innovation of medical devices and gradual accumulation of surgical experience, feasibility and safety of performing SILC and SIRC will improve.

Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial

Background:

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) can be done as a day-case procedure and may have advantages over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We present the results of our study looking at post-operative pain and post-operative recovery time.

Methods:

This was a single-institution randomised double-blind controlled trial. Seventy-three patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were randomized to SILC (n = 37) or LC (n = 36). The primary endpoint was to compare post-operative pain. We also compared surgical time, procedural difficulty, adverse events, additional ports used and conversion rate, success of day surgery process, return to work, aesthetic satisfaction, quality of life and 4-year incisional hernia rate.

Results:

In the SILC group, post-operative analgesic requirements were lower on day 7, there was an earlier return to work and cosmetic satisfaction was significantly higher. The SILC procedure presented a higher technical difficulty. Operative time, surgical complications, post-operative pain, success of the day-case process, return to normal activity, quality of life scores and incisional hernia rates were similar for both the procedures.

Conclusions:

SILC has advantages over LC in terms of late post-operative analgesic requirements and aesthetic results; however, it is technically harder to perform. There was no benefit in terms of day surgery outcomes.

Robotic Single-Port Platform in General, Urologic, and Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic platforms have recently acquired progressive importance in different surgical fields, such as urology, gynecology, and general surgery. Through the years, new surgical robots have become available as single-port robotic platform. The study is aimed to value the single-port robotic platform characteristics in different surgical specialties.

METHODS

The terms "LESS" OR "single port" OR "single site" AND "robot" OR "robotic" were systematically used to search the PubMed and Scopus databases. A total of 57 studies were considered eligible for the present review. The articles included were divided according to the surgical field in which the study was conducted: General surgery (29 articles), Gynecology (18 articles), Urology (10 articles).

RESULTS

Most part of the articles showed the feasibility of robotic single-port surgical procedures and described advantages in terms of cosmetic, hospital stay, and in some series even cost reduction. A meta-analysis was conducted, showing a significant increment of complications using RSP if compared with SLPS and a trend (P = 0.008) when RSP was compared with LESS. The comparison of different techniques in terms of conversion to laparotomy did not show any significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Robotic single port potentially furnishes an important surgical and post-operatory improvement; however, some limits still prolong the surgical time and complication rate.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

METHODS

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

Robotic single-site surgery for mature cyst teratoma cystectomy: an initial case series study in a single medical center in China

Objective

To report the first case series of robotic single-site (RSS) surgery via the da Vinci Si Surgical System for mature cyst teratoma cystectomy in China.

Materials and methods

The study was devised as a retrospective study in a single medical center. Five patients with mature cyst teratomas requested a minimally invasive surgical treatment. These patients were treated with RSS surgery for mature cyst teratoma between January 2014 and January 2015. RSS mature cyst teratoma cystectomies were performed with the da Vinci single-site platform in the Hainan branch of PLA General Hospital. Data regarding patient characteristics, surgical approach, and perioperative clinical outcomes were collected and analyzed in a retrospective study.

Results

All RSS procedures were completed successfully in the five patients. No instrument failure was noted during the procedures. The median operating time was 65 minutes (range 45–100 minutes). The median docking time was 20 minutes (range 18–28 minutes). No instrument failure was noted during any surgical procedures. The median blood loss was 30 mL (range 10–70 mL). No patient had massive intraoperative bleeding nor required a transfusion. No extra trocar was placed during the surgery. None of the patients had bladder or rectal injury. The median length of stay in hospital was 2.8 days. All patients were followed up until 6 months postoperatively, and no surgical complication occurred.

Conclusion

RSS mature cyst teratoma cystectomy using the wristed semirigid instrumentation is feasible. Randomized controlled trials with a larger number of patients and longer postoperative follow-up should be conducted to further evaluate the effect of this therapeutic strategy.

Enabling single-site laparoscopy: the SPORT platform

BACKGROUND

The Single Port Orifice Robotic Technology (SPORT) Surgical System by Titan Medical Inc. is designed to overcome the inherent challenges of minimally invasive single-access procedures. The aim of this preclinical study was to evaluate the feasibility of various digestive surgery procedures using this novel surgical robotic platform.

METHODS

A total of 12 minimally invasive procedures were performed on six pigs (5 cholecystectomies, 3 Nissen fundoplications, 1 splenectomy and 1 hepatic pedicle dissection) and on one human cadaver (1 cholecystectomy and 1 Nissen fundoplication), by four laparoscopic surgeons. The usability of the device was assessed by means of the modified objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) score that was calculated and analyzed by two independent observers on the recorded videos. Surgeon feedback and recommendations were systematically recorded.

RESULTS

All procedures were successfully completed with the SPORT system. In general, surgeons reported to appreciate the intuitive interface and controls, the high-resolution 3D imaging, the dexterity of the end-effectors, and the ergonomic open control platform. Some features requiring optimization were also identified. The modified OSATS score demonstrated a learning curve effect for all device-related tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

A variety of abdominal procedures could be safely completed with the current SPORT prototype, in the preclinical setting. This preliminary feasibility experience is promising and encourages further development of single-port robotically assisted surgery.

Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) is the gold standard technique for cholecystectomy. In order to reduce postoperative pain and improve cosmetic results, the application of the single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) technique was introduced, leading surgeons to face important challenges. Robotic technology has been proposed to overcome some of these limitations. The purpose of this review is to assess the safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) for benign disease.

METHODS

An Embase and Pubmed literature search was performed in February 2017. Randomized controlled trial and prospective observational studies were selected and assessed using PRISMA recommendations. Primary outcome was overall postoperative complication rate. Secondary outcomes were postoperative bile leak rate, total conversion rate, operative time, wound complication rate, postoperative hospital stay, and port site hernia rate. The outcomes were analyzed in Forest plots based on fixed and random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies provided data about 1010 patients who underwent to SIRC for benign disease of gallbladder. Overall postoperative complications rate was 11.6% but only 4/1010 (0.4%) patients required further surgery. A postoperative bile leak was reported in 3/950 patients (0.3%). Conversion occurred in 4.2% of patients. Mean operative time was 86.7 min including an average of 42 min should be added as for robotic console time. Wound complications occurred in 3.7% of patients. Median postoperative hospital stay was 1 day. Port site hernia at the latest follow-up available was reported in 5.2% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the Da Vinci robot in single-port cholecystectomy seems to have similar results in terms of incidence and grade of complications compared to standard laparoscopy. In addition, it seems affected by the same limitations of single-port surgery, consisting of an increased operative time and incidence of port site hernia.

Robotic single-site versus multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a case-matched analysis of short- and long-term costs

BACKGROUND

Multiport laparoscopy is the gold-standard approach for cholecystectomy, and single-port laparoscopy has been developed to further reduce its invasiveness. A specific robotic single-port platform (da Vinci single-site, Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been released in 2011, which could technically facilitate single-site cholecystectomy. Current data show its feasibility; however, detailed short- and long-term analyses of costs and comparisons relative to multiport laparoscopy are not available to date.

METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic single-site cholecystectomy for benign, clinically noninflammatory disease between 2011 and 2015 were matched for disease, age, gender, BMI, ASA classification, diagnosis, and elapsed year of surgery to a cohort of multiport cholecystectomies. Demographic, perioperative, and long-term data were collected retrospectively and analyzed. Perioperative and long-term costs including re-operations due to the primary procedure until February 2017 were compared across both cohorts.

RESULTS

99 patients who underwent robotic single-site cholecystectomy were matched to 99 patients with multiport cholecystectomy. A higher rate of outpatient procedures in the robotic cohort (31.3 vs. 17.2%, p = 0.0305) was found, and demographic parameters and perioperative clinical outcomes were similar. Perioperative costs were significantly higher for the robotic single-site patients (6158.0 vs. 4288.0 USD, p < 0.0001). With similar follow-up times of 59.0 and 58.9 months, respectively (p = 0.9552), significantly more patients of the robotic Single-Site cohort underwent follow-up surgery (7.1 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.0140), and follow-up costs were significantly higher for the robotic cohort (694.7 vs. 0.0 USD, p = 0.0145).

CONCLUSION

With similar early postoperative clinical results and a higher rate of re-operations, perioperative and long-term costs are significantly higher with robotic Single-Site cholecystectomy compared with multiport cholecystectomy. Considering the unclear clinical value of robotic single-site cholecystectomy and the significant short- and long-term costs, a call for further research and a debate as to who should bear the costs beyond the ones of the gold-standard treatment appear reasonable.