A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy

Background To compare the perioperative and short-term efficacy and cost of the da Vinci Xi and da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 175 patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si or Xi surgical systems in our hospital from June 2019 to June 2020. Of the 175 patients, 82 underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Xi surgery system, and 93 patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si surgical system. The perioperative outcomes, short-term efficacy and costs were compared between the two groups. Results The anesthesia time, operation time, docking time, indwelling catheter time and postoperative bed rest time in the Xi group were shorter than those in the Si group (respectively, 268.8 min vs. 219.3 min, P = 0.001; 228.2 min vs. 259.6 min, P < 0.001; 7.4 min vs. 12.7 min, P < 0.001; 8.6 d vs. 9.7 d, P = 0.036; 2.2 d vs. 2.6 d, P = 0.002). However, the total cost of hospitalization and the cost of intraoperative consumables in the Xi group were higher than those in the Si group (84,740.7 vs. 76,739.1 ¥, P = 0.003; 13,199.4 vs. 10,823.0 ¥, P = 0.019). Conclusions Although the cost of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is higher, compared with the Si system, the Xi system has better perioperative outcomes and can provide similar short-term efficacy and oncology outcomes.

Postoperative Pain After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair

Background: Robot-assisted ventral hernia repair, when performed correctly, may reduce the risk for pain and discomfort in the postoperative period thus enabling shorter hospital stay. The aim of the present study was to evaluate postoperative pain following robot-assisted laparoscopic repair. The approach was selected after an intraoperative decision to complete the repair as: (1). Transabdominal Preperitoneal Repair (TAPP); (2). Trans-Abdominal RetroMuscular (TARM) repair; or (3). Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM) repair depending on anatomical conditions.Methods: Twenty ventral hernia repairs, 8 primary and 12 incisional, were included between 18th Dec 2017 and 11th Nov 2019. There were 8 women, mean age was 60.3 years, and mean diameter of the defect was 3.8 cm. The repairs were performed at Södersjukhuset (Southern General Hospital, Stockholm) using the Da Vinci Si Surgical System®. Sixteen repairs were completed with the TAPP technique, 2 with the TARM technique, and 2 as IPOM repair.Results: Mean hospital stay was 1.05 days. No postoperative infection was seen, and no recurrence was seen at 1 year. At the 30-day follow-up, fifteen patients (75%) rated their pain as zero or pain that was easily ignored, according to the Ventral Hernia Pain Questionnaire. After 1 year no one had pain that was not easily ignored.Conclusion: The present study shows that robot-assisted laparoscopic ventral hernia is feasible and safe. More randomized controlled trials are needed to show that the potential benefits in terms of shorter operation times, earlier discharge, and less postoperative pain motivate the extra costs associated with the robot technique.

Robotic Transanal Surgery. Initial Experience in a Developing Country

Background Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a surgical technique used for the excision of rectal neoplasia that gained popularity during the last decade.Due to the technical difficulty (non-articulated instruments, reduced workspace) and the long learning curve associated with this technique, the use of robotic platforms to improve resection results has been suggested and reported, at the same time that the learning curve decreases and the procedure is facilitated Materials and Methods From March 2017 to December 2019, all patients with rectal lesions eligible for TAMIS were offered the possibility to receive a robotic TAMIS (R-TAMIS). We used a transanal GelPoint Path (Applied Medical Inc., Santa Margarita, CA, USA) in the anal canal to be able to do the Da Vinci Si (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) robotic platform docking, which we used to perform the excision of the rectal lesion as well as the resection site defect. Results Five patients between 34 and 79 years of age underwent R-TAMIS. The mean distance to the anal verge was 8.8 cm. There were no conversions. The mean surgery time was 85 minutes, and the mean docking time was 6.6 minutes. Conclusions Robotic TAMIS is a feasible alternative to TAMIS, with a faster learning curve for experienced surgeons in transanal surgery and better ergonomics. Further studies are needed to assess the cost-benefit relationship.

Experiences of a “COVID protected” robotic surgical centre for colorectal and urological cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic

The recent COVID-19 pandemic led to the cancellation of elective surgery across the United Kingdom. Re-establishing elective surgery in a manner that ensures patient and staff safety has been a priority. We report our experience and patient outcomes from setting up a “COVID protected” robotic unit for colorectal and renal surgery that housed both the da Vinci Si (Intuitive, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and the Versius (CMR Surgical, Cambridge, UK) robotic systems. “COVID protected” robotic surgery was undertaken in a day-surgical unit attached to the main hospital. A standard operating procedure was developed in collaboration with the trust COVID-19 leadership team and adapted to national recommendations. 60 patients underwent elective robotic surgery in the initial 10-weeks of the study. This included 10 colorectal procedures and 50 urology procedures. Median length of stay was 4 days for rectal cancer procedures, 2 days less than prior to the COVID period, and 1 day for renal procedures. There were no instances of in-patient coronavirus transmission. Six rectal cancer patients waited more than 62 days for their surgery because of the initial COVID peak but none had an increase T-stage between pre-operative staging and post-operative histology. Robotic surgery can be undertaken in “COVID protected” units within acute hospitals in a safe way that mitigates the increased risk of undergoing major surgery in the current pandemic. Some benefits were seen such as reduced length of stay for colorectal patients that may be associated with having a dedicated unit for elective robotic surgical services.

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: The University of Florence Technique

Objective: To provide a step-by-step overview of the University of Florence technique for robotic living donor nephrectomy (LDN), focusing on its technical nuances and perioperative outcomes.Methods: A dedicated robotic LDN program at our Institution was codified in 2012. Data from patients undergoing robotic LDN from 2012 to 2019 were prospectively collected. All robotic LDNs were performed by a highly experienced surgeon, using the da Vinci Si robotic platform in a three-arm configuration. In this report we provide a detailed overview of our surgical technique for robotic LDN. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of the technique, including perioperative surgical complications rate and mid-term functional outcomes.Results: Overall, 36 patients undergoing robotic LDNs were included in the study. Of these, 28 (78%) were left LDNs. Median (IQR) donor pre-operative eGFR was 88 (75.6–90) ml/min/1.73 m2. In all cases, robotic LDN was completed without need of conversion. The median (IQR) overall operative time was 230 (195–258) min, while the median console time was 133 (IQR 117-166) min. The median (IQR) warm ischemia time was 175 (140–255) s. No intraoperative adverse events or 90-d major surgical complications were recorded. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 24 months (IQR 11-46), median (IQR) eGFR patients undergoing in living donor nephrectomy was 57.4 (47.9; 63.9) ml/min/1.73 m2.Conclusions: In our experience, robotic LDN is technically feasible and safe. The use of robotic surgery for LDN may provide distinct advantages for surgeons while ensuring optimal donors' perioperative and functional outcomes.

Training in robotic surgery: initial experience using the Brazilian College of Surgeons model

ABSTRACT Objective: to present the initial experience of the first tier of surgeons trained in the new model of robotic surgery training proposed by the CBC. Methods: we retrospectively collected data and information on training with the Da Vinci SI robotic system. The variables analyzed were, in the pre-clinical phase, time of completion of each step by surgeon and number of hours in the simulator, and in the clinical phase, operations carried out by the training group, number of surgeons who performed nine procedures in ninety days (“9 in 90”), time of docking, time of console, and results surgical. Results: we interviewed 39 surgeons before training started; 20 (51.3%) reached the clinical phase. The average age of surgeons was 47.9 years (38-62). The average time between the first interview and the delivery of the online certificate was 64 days (15-133). The surgeons have made an average of 51h and 36 minutes of robot simulation (40-83 hours). The total number of cases in which the training surgeons participated as first assistant was 418, with an average of 20.9 per surgeon. The time of pre-clinical training had an average of 116 days (48-205). Conclusion: the new model proposed had good acceptance by all surgeons trained and proved safe in the initial sample.

Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: surgical technique and short-term experience from 329 cases

ABSTRACT Objective: minimally invasive bariatric surgery is clearly superior over open procedures including better early outcomes. Different surgical approaches are used to treat the severely obese, having Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) being a highly frequent procedure. Robotic surgery overcomes some laparoscopic limitations adding ergonomics, articulating instruments and a three-dimensional high definition camera. Based on our vast robotic experience, we present our referred group case series and a standardized Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB) technique as well as its outcomes. Methods: a review of a prospective maintained database was conducted in patients submitted to robotic Roux en Y bariatric surgery between April 2015 and July 2019. Surgical technique is described and illustrated. We also reported patients demographics, outcomes and its follow-up. Results: a Retrospective analysis identified 329 patients submitted to Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Both da Vinci Si and Xi platforms were used. Mean age was 34.4 years, with median BMI of 44.2 kg/m2. Mean console time was 102 min and there was no conversion. No surgical hospital readmission rates were seen in the first 30 days. Conclusion: this study represents our initial experience of robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB), its short outcomes and a standardized surgical technique. Our results encourage that rRYGB is technically feasible and safe, and might offer some advantages showing good outcomes and minimal complications.