Literature DB >> 33160915

Pure Single-site Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Versus Multiport Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-institution Comparative Study.

Louis Lenfant1, Guilherme Sawczyn2, Alireza Aminsharifi3, Soodong Kim2, Clark A Wilson2, Alp T Beksac2, Zeyad Schwen2, Jihad Kaouk4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pure single-site robot-assisted extraperitoneal prostatectomy (EPP) using a single-port (SP) robotic platform has been shown to be feasible and safe in previous descriptive studies.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing SP-EPP versus conventional multiport (MP) transperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From January 2019 to January 2020, data of 100 consecutive patients who underwent SP-EPP performed by the same surgeon and 110 consecutive patients who underwent MP-RARP by three surgeons from the same institution were prospectively collected. INTERVENTION: All SP-EPPs were performed in a pure single-site fashion without Trendelenburg. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Demographic characteristics as well as intra- and postoperative data of patients in both groups were analyzed. Quantitative data were described in terms of median and quartiles. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After SP-EPP, the rate of patients discharged the same day was nine times higher than that after MP-RARP (p < 0.001), and the median length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter: 4.3 h (interquartile range [IQR] 3.3-17.4) versus 26.1 h (IQR 21.5-44.8). The rate of opioid use in the hospital and after discharge in the SP group was at least half that in the MP group (respectively, 32% vs 64%, p < 0.001, and 35% vs 87%, p < 0.001). The overall positive surgical margin rate as well as continence rate at 12 mo (85% vs 88%, p = 0.97) and the prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival (p = 0.09) were statistically comparable between the SP and MP groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Pure single-site SP-EPP was associated with a shorter length of stay as well as a decreased need for postoperative pain medication and narcotic administration in comparison with conventional transperitoneal multiport prostatectomy, with comparable postoperative complications and readmission rate. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer using a single-port robotic platform allows for a shorter hospital stay, less pain, and less opioid use than conventional robotic surgery without more morbidity. TAKE  HOME MESSAGE: Pure single-site single-port extraperitoneal prostatectomy was associated with a shorter length of stay as well as a decreased need for postoperative pain medication and narcotic administration in comparison with conventional transperitoneal multiport prostatectomy, with comparable postoperative complication and readmission rate.
Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comparative effectiveness; Prostate neoplasm; Prostatectomy; Robotic; Robotic surgery; Single-port surgery

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33160915     DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.10.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Focus        ISSN: 2405-4569


  10 in total

1.  Single-port versus multi-port: will "one for all" ever become a new standard for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy?

Authors:  Riccardo Bertolo; Chiara Cipriani; Juan Garisto; Pierluigi Bove
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-07-20

2.  Single-port versus multiport partial nephrectomy: a propensity-score-matched comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Robert Harrison; Mutahar Ahmed; Mubashir Billah; Fahad Sheckley; Tina Lulla; Christina Caviasco; Angeline Sanders; Gregory Lovallo; Michael Stifelman
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-06-01

3.  Does type of robotic platform make a difference in the final cost of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy?

Authors:  Marcio Covas Moschovas; Talia Helman; Seetharam Bhat; Marco Sandri; Travis Rogers; Jonathan Noel; Sunil Reddy; Cathy Corder; Vipul Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-01-28

4.  Comparison of single-port and multi-port robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?

Authors:  Jinze Li; Dehong Cao; Yin Huang; Qiang Wei
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2022-06

5.  A reply letter for comparison of single-port and multi-port robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?

Authors:  Yong Wei; Qianying Ji; Wenren Zuo; Shiyan Wang; Xinyi Wang; Qingyi Zhu
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2022-06

6.  Single-port robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is associated with decreased post-operative narcotic use in a propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Vishnu Ganesan; Ryan L Steinberg; Alaina Garbens; Hersh Trivedi; Igor Sorokin; Claus A Roehrborn; Brett A Johnson; Jeffrey C Gahan
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-04-10

7.  Efficacy and safety of single port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yong Wei; Qianying Ji; Wenren Zuo; Shiyan Wang; Xinyi Wang; Qingyi Zhu
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-12

8.  Single-site multiport vs. conventional multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A propensity score matching comparative study.

Authors:  Weibin Hou; Bingzhi Wang; Lei Zhou; Lan Li; Chao Li; Peng Yuan; Wei Ouyang; Hanyu Yao; Jin Huang; Kun Yao; Long Wang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-28

9.  Patient surgical satisfaction after da Vinci® single-port and multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Jonathan Noël; Marcio Covas Moschovas; Marco Sandri; Seetharam Bhat; Travis Rogers; Sunil Reddy; Cathy Corder; Vipul Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-06-18

Review 10.  Single-Port versus Multiple-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Omar Fahmy; Usama A Fahmy; Nabil A Alhakamy; Mohd Ghani Khairul-Asri
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 4.241

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.