Literature DB >> 15017273

Robotic microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study in a rat model.

Jonathan Schiff1, Philip S Li, Marc Goldstein.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy remain technically challenging procedures. Refinements in technique have continually improved patency and pregnancy rates for the 2 procedures in experienced hands. Advances in surgical robotics produced the Da Vinci robot (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, California) with motion reduction and no tremor, features that may improve outcomes in microsurgery. We report a randomized prospective study of vasoepididymostomy and vasovasostomy using the Da Vinci robot in rats.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 24 adult male Wistar rats underwent vasectomy through a midline abdominal incision. Two weeks later the animals were randomized to microsurgical multilayer vasovasostomy, longitudinal vasoepididymostomy or robotic vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy groups. Outcomes measured included surgical time, complications, patency and sperm granuloma formation at 9 weeks.
RESULTS: Animals were sacrificed 9 weeks after microsurgery. There were no significant differences in complications among the groups. Robotic vasovasostomy was significantly faster than the conventional microsurgical technique (68.5 vs 102.5 minutes, p = 0.002). The robotic and microsurgical vasoepididymostomy groups did not differ significantly in time. Patency rates were 100% for the robotic vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy groups, and 90% in the microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy groups. These differences were not significant. Sperm granulomas were found in 70% of microsurgical vasovasostomy anastomoses and 27% of robotic vasovasostomy anastomoses (p = 0.001). No significant difference in the sperm granuloma rate was found between the robotic or microsurgical vasoepididymostomy groups (42% and 50%, respectively, p = 0.37).
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge we report the first randomized prospective study using the Da Vinci robot for microsurgery. We believe that the improved stability and motion reduction during microsurgical suturing with the robot helped achieve excellent patency rates for vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy. The robot may also allow experienced microsurgeons to perform microsurgical procedures in patients at remote locations where no experienced microsurgeons are available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15017273     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000115902.00988.68

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  20 in total

1.  Robotic vasovasostomy: description of technique and review of initial results.

Authors:  Michael G Santomauro; Chong H Choe; James O L'Esperance; Brian K Auge
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-07-08

2.  Robot-assisted vasovasostomy using a single layer anastomosis.

Authors:  Michael T Marshall; Alexander D Doudt; Jonathan H Berger; Brian K Auge; Matthew S Christman; Chong H Choe
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-11-07

Review 3.  Robotic assisted andrological surgery.

Authors:  Sijo J Parekattil; Ahmet Gudeloglu
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-12-17       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 4.  Advances in male reproductive surgery: robotic-assisted vasovasostomy.

Authors:  Saad Elzanaty; Gert Dohle
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2012-12-21

5.  Robotic-assisted microvascular surgery: skill acquisition in a rat model.

Authors:  Nicholas S Clarke; Johnathan Price; Travis Boyd; Stefano Salizzoni; Kenton J Zehr; Alejandro Nieponice; Pietro Bajona
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-08-10

Review 6.  Male infertility microsurgical training.

Authors:  Akanksha Mehta; Philip S Li
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 7.  The evolution and refinement of vasoepididymostomy techniques.

Authors:  Peter T Chan
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.285

8.  Robotic hypospadias surgery: a new evolution.

Authors:  Pasquale Casale; Thomas S Lendvay
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-11-26

Review 9.  Anesthetic Challenges in Robotic-assisted Urologic Surgery.

Authors:  Richard L Hsu; Alan D Kaye; Richard D Urman
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2013

10.  Robotic instrumentation: Evolution and microsurgical applications.

Authors:  Sijo J Parekattil; Michael E Moran
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2010-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.