The Availability, Cost, Limitations, Learning Curve and Future of Robotic Systems in Urology and Prostate Cancer Surgery

Efficiency and productivity gains of robotic surgery: The case of the English National Health Service

This paper examines the effect of new medical technology (robotic surgery) on efficiency gains and productivity changes for surgical treatment in patients with prostate cancer from the perspective of a public health sector organization. In particular, we consider three interrelated surgical technologies within the English National Health System: robotic, laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy. Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are minimally invasive procedures with similar clinical benefits. While the clinical benefits in adopting robotic surgery over laparoscopic intervention are unproven, it requires a high initial investment cost and carries high on-going maintenance costs. Using data from Hospital Episode Statistics for the period 2000-2018, we observe growing volumes of prostatectomies over time, mostly driven by an increase in robotic-assisted surgeries, and further analyze whether hospital providers that adopted a robot see improved measures of throughput. We then quantify changes in total factor and labor productivity arising from the use of this technology. We examine the impact of robotic adoption on efficiency gains employing a staggered difference-in-difference estimator and find evidence of a 50% reduction in length of stay (LoS), 49% decrease in post-LoS and 44% and 46% decrease in postoperative visits after 1 year and 2 years, respectively. Productivity analysis shows the growth in radical prostatectomy volume is sustained with a relatively stable number of urology surgeons. The robotic technique increases total production at the hospital level between 21% and 26%, coupled with a 29% improvement in labor productivity. These benefits lend some, but not overwhelming support for the large-scale hospital investments in such costly technology.

Evaluating the utility of robotic axillary lymph node dissection in patients with invasive breast cancer: a systematic review

Robot-assisted axillary lymph node dissection (RALND) has been proposed to improve surgical and oncological outcomes for patients with breast cancer. To perform a systematic review of current literature evaluating RALND in patients with invasive breast cancer. A systematic search was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Studies outlining outcomes following RALND were included. Two studies involving 92 patients were included in this review. Of these, 41 underwent RALND using the da Vinci© robotic system (44.57%), and 51 underwent conventional axillary lymph node dissection (CALND) (55.43%). There was no significant difference observed with respect to intra-operative blood loss or duration of procedure in those undergoing CALND and RALND (P > 0.050). One study reported a significant difference in lymphoedema rates in support of RALND (6.67% vs 26.67%, P = 0.038). Overall, data in relation to postoperative fat necrosis (10.00% vs 33.33%, P = 0.028), wound infection rates (3.33% vs. 20.00%, P = 0.044), and wound ≤ 40 mm in length (63.63% vs. 19.05%, P = 0.020) supported RALND. Oncological outcomes were only reported in one of the studies, which concluded that there was no local or metastatic recurrence in either group at 3-month follow-up. These provisional results support RALND as a safe alternative to CALND. Notwithstanding, the paucity of data limits the robustness of conclusions which may be drawn surrounding the adoption of RALND as the standard of care. Further high-quality studies are required to ratify these findings.

RARPKB: a knowledge-guide decision support platform for personalized robot-assisted surgery in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has emerged as a pivotal surgical intervention for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). However, the complexity of clinical cases, heterogeneity of PCa, and limitations in physician expertise pose challenges to rational decision-making in RARP. To address these challenges, the authors aimed to organize the knowledge of previously complex cohorts and establish an online platform named the RARP knowledge base (RARPKB) to provide reference evidence for personalized treatment plans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed searches over the past two decades were conducted to identify publications describing RARP. The authors collected, classified, and structured surgical details, patient information, surgical data, and various statistical results from the literature. A knowledge-guided decision-support tool was established using MySQL, DataTable, ECharts, and JavaScript. ChatGPT-4 and two assessment scales were used to validate and compare the platform.

RESULTS

The platform comprised 583 studies, 1589 cohorts, 1 911 968 patients, and 11 986 records, resulting in 54 834 data entries. The knowledge-guided decision support tool provide personalized surgical plan recommendations and potential complications on the basis of patients' baseline and surgical information. Compared with ChatGPT-4, RARPKB outperformed in authenticity (100% vs. 73%), matching (100% vs. 53%), personalized recommendations (100% vs. 20%), matching of patients (100% vs. 0%), and personalized recommendations for complications (100% vs. 20%). Postuse, the average System Usability Scale score was 88.88±15.03, and the Net Promoter Score of RARPKB was 85. The knowledge base is available at: http://rarpkb.bioinf.org.cn .

CONCLUSIONS

The authors introduced the pioneering RARPKB, the first knowledge base for robot-assisted surgery, with an emphasis on PCa. RARPKB can assist in personalized and complex surgical planning for PCa to improve its efficacy. RARPKB provides a reference for the future applications of artificial intelligence in clinical practice.

Da Vinci vs. Hugo RAS for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparative single-center study

PURPOSE

To evaluate Hugo RAS against the Da Vinci system for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) in prostate cancer treatment.

METHODS

We compared outcomes of 150 patients with prostate cancer undergoing RARP with either Hugo or Da Vinci systems. Our analysis included operative, postoperative, pathological, and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Both groups had 75 patients. Baseline characteristics and tumor features were similar. Intraoperatively, Da Vinci had a shorter docking time (10.45 vs. 18.62 min, p = 0.02), but total operative times were comparable (145.34 vs 138.95, p = 0.85). Hugo outperformed in neck dissection and lymphadenectomy times (22 vs 13.67 min, p = 0.027 and 37.82 vs 45.77 min, p = 0.025). Postoperative metrics like stay duration, catheter time, and complications showed no significant difference. Functional results, using IPSS and IIEF5, were similar between systems. Six Da Vinci patients (8%) and nine Hugo patients (12%) experienced social incontinence (p = 0.072). Pathological outcomes like T stage, Gleason Score, and nodes removed were alike. However, Hugo had more positive surgical margins (20% vs. 10.67%, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

RARP outcomes using Hugo RAS were similar to the Da Vinci system in our study. More research and extended follow-up are required to ascertain long-term oncological and functional results.

Robotic surgery education in Australia and New Zealand: primetime for a curriculum

BACKGROUND

Globally, robotic surgery (RS) has witnessed remarkable growth, yet Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) lack dedicated RS training programs, creating a workforce gap. This narrative review synthesises international research to explore trends and challenges in robotic education.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review, searching PubMed, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE using keywords like 'robotic surgery', 'surgical education', 'robotic surgery training', and 'robotic surgery curriculum'. We selected studies contributing to understanding current curricula, training tools, and issues in robotic education, utilising the international experience and how it might apply to the ANZ context.

RESULTS

RS in ANZ has grown significantly over two decades, but formal curricula for trainees are absent. North America and Europe employ diverse training tools and curricula. Barriers include cost, access, time constraints, equipment complexity, changing training environments, and competition from emerging robotic surgical systems. Balancing the curriculum's demands with trainees' existing requirements is essential.

CONCLUSION

Developing a tailored RS curriculum within ANZ's surgical training is crucial for RS to become the primary surgical approach in the future. By working towards a national curriculum we can prepare skilled trainees in robotics to meet the rising demand. The most significant barrier is the lack of robotics in public hospital where trainees are based. This curriculum should encompass online teaching modules, bedside assistance, surgical simulation, dual console mentoring, and primary operator experience.

Workflow disruptions in robot-assisted surgery

Surgical flow disruptions are unexpected deviations from the natural progression which can potentially compromise the safety of the operation. Separation of the surgeon from the patient and team members is the main contributor for flow disruptions (FDs) in robot-assisted surgery (RAS). FDs have been categorised as communication, coordination, surgeon task considerations, training, equipment/ technology, external factors, instrument changes, and environmental factors. There may be an association between FDs and task error rate. Intervention to counter FDs include training, operating room adjustments, checklists, teamwork, communication improvement, ergonomics, technology, guidelines, workflow optimisation, and team briefing. Future studies should focus on identifying the significant disruptive FDs and the impact of interventions on surgical flow during RAS.

Visualisation ergonomics and robotic surgery

Stereopsis may be an advantage of robotic surgery. Perceived robotic ergonomic advantages in visualisation include better exposure, three-dimensional vision, surgeon camera control, and line of sight screen location. Other ergonomic factors relating to visualisation include stereo-acuity, vergence-accommodation mismatch, visual-perception mismatch, visual-vestibular mismatch, visuospatial ability, visual fatigue, and visual feedback to compensate for lack of haptic feedback. Visual fatigue symptoms may be related to dry eye or accommodative/binocular vision stress. Digital eye strain can be measured by questionnaires and objective tests. Management options include treatment of dry eye, correction of refractive error, and management of accommodation and vergence anomalies. Experienced robotic surgeons can use visual cues like tissue deformation and surgical tool information as surrogates for haptic feedback.

Benefits of robotic-assisted lymphatic microsurgery in deep anatomical planes

Micro- and supermicrosurgeries have become standard techniques for lymphatic reconstruction. As increasingly smaller vessels are being targeted, robotic-assisted surgery has emerged as a new approach to push reconstructive limits owing to its ability of motion scaling and providing better accessibility of deep anatomical regions. The precision of the robot is achieved at the expense of operating speed among other variables; therefore, the surgeon must weigh the enhanced dexterity against the additional operating time and cost required for the robotic surgical system itself to ensure optimal resource utilization. Here we present a case series of 8 patients who underwent robot-assisted lymphatic microsurgery for omental flap transfer to the axilla and lympho-venous anastomosis. The Symani® Surgical System was used with a conventional microscope or 3D exoscope. The use of 3D exoscope provided clear benefits in terms of surgeon positioning. Moreover, access to the recipient vessels near the thoracic wall was significantly improved with the robotic setup. In addition, suture precision was excellent, resulting in patent anastomoses. Operating time for anastomosis was comparable to that for manual anastomosis and demonstrated a steep learning curve. The benefits of robotic systems in operating fields with good exposure require further evaluation. However, owing to longer instruments, additional stability, dexterity, and motion precision, robotic systems offer a marked advantage for operating in deep anatomical planes and on small structures. A potentially new field for the implementation of robotic surgery is central lymphatic reconstruction. Progress in terms of operating time and cost is crucial, and future research should validate the effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery in larger clinical studies.

New Robotic Platforms in General Surgery: What's the Current Clinical Scenario?

Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted in general surgery worldwide but access to this technology is still limited to a few hospitals. With the recent introduction of new robotic platforms, several studies reported the feasibility of different surgical procedures. The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the current clinical practice with the new robotic platforms in general surgery. Materials and Methods: A grey literature search was performed on the Internet to identify the available robotic systems. A PRISMA compliant systematic review was conducted for all English articles up to 10 February 2023 searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Clinical outcomes, training process, operating surgeon background, cost-analysis, and specific registries were evaluated. Results: A total of 103 studies were included for qualitative synthesis after the full-text screening. Of the fifteen robotic platforms identified, only seven were adopted in a clinical environment. Out of 4053 patients, 2819 were operated on with a new robotic device. Hepatopancreatobiliary surgery specialty performed the majority of procedures, and the most performed procedure was cholecystectomy. Globally, 109 emergency surgeries were reported. Concerning the training process, only 45 papers reported the background of the operating surgeon, and only 28 papers described the training process on the surgical platform. Only one cost-analysis compared a new robot to the existing reference. Two manufacturers promoted a specific registry to collect clinical outcomes. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the feasibility of most surgical procedures in general surgery using the new robotic platforms. Adoption of these new devices in general surgery is constantly growing with the extension of regulatory approvals. Standardization of the training process and the assessment of skills' transferability is still lacking. Further studies are required to better understand the real clinical and economical benefit.