Cargando…
Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review
Several studies have assessed the safety and feasibility of single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using different and custom built robotic-assisted technology. In part due to the non-standardized nature of these approaches, single site robotic prostatectomy has not been widely adopted. Wi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7215004/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32420205 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.11.05 |
_version_ | 1783532091567243264 |
---|---|
author | Lai, Andrew Dobbs, Ryan W. Talamini, Susan Halgrimson, Whitney R. Wilson, Jessica O. Vigneswaran, Hari T. Crivellaro, Simone |
author_facet | Lai, Andrew Dobbs, Ryan W. Talamini, Susan Halgrimson, Whitney R. Wilson, Jessica O. Vigneswaran, Hari T. Crivellaro, Simone |
author_sort | Lai, Andrew |
collection | PubMed |
description | Several studies have assessed the safety and feasibility of single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using different and custom built robotic-assisted technology. In part due to the non-standardized nature of these approaches, single site robotic prostatectomy has not been widely adopted. With the recent approval of the da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA) Single Port (SP) platform, there has been a renewed interest in single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and several institutions have begun reporting their initial experiences with this technique. In this systematic review, we sought to assess and summarize the literature regarding patient outcomes for single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and evaluate its role in surgical treatment of prostate cancer. This systematic review was structured using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies describing the use of any robotic platform, including da Vinci Si, Xi or SP platforms for robotic single-port or single site radical prostatectomy between 2000 and July 15, 2019 were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Studies were excluded if they included combined cases with other organ resection, represented use in a non-clinical setting (such as a cadaveric model), or described results for a simple prostatectomy technique. Data was extracted by two authors with concerns resolved by consensus. Primary outcomes were mean operative times, estimated blood loss (mL), and hospital length of stay (days). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative conversion to open surgery, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Variables of interest included sample size (n), mean age (years), mean prostate size (mL), prostate specific antigen (PSA, ng/mL), Gleason score, clinical and pathological TNM staging [American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC)], lymph nodes (n) and perioperative complications as available. A total of 217 studies were reviewed by title and abstract, with 28 selected for full-text review; ultimately, 12 studies were included, with available data from 145 patients. Primary outcomes and preoperative characteristics varied greatly amongst patients and across studies. One patient (0.7%) required conversion to a multi-port approach and there were no conversions to an open technique. No intraoperative complications were reported, and no Clavien grade III or greater postoperative complications have been described in the initial 81 radical prostatectomies performed with the SP platform. Single Port techniques appear to represent a safe and feasible approach for performing the minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. The current available literature on the single port radical prostatectomy is weak and consists of single center studies with small sample sizes, short-term follow up and limited functional data. More rigorous multi-center trials with standardized metrics for reporting functional outcomes as well as long-term cancer specific survival are necessary to validate these initial studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7215004 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72150042020-05-15 Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review Lai, Andrew Dobbs, Ryan W. Talamini, Susan Halgrimson, Whitney R. Wilson, Jessica O. Vigneswaran, Hari T. Crivellaro, Simone Transl Androl Urol Review Article on Robotic-assisted Urologic Surgery Several studies have assessed the safety and feasibility of single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using different and custom built robotic-assisted technology. In part due to the non-standardized nature of these approaches, single site robotic prostatectomy has not been widely adopted. With the recent approval of the da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA) Single Port (SP) platform, there has been a renewed interest in single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and several institutions have begun reporting their initial experiences with this technique. In this systematic review, we sought to assess and summarize the literature regarding patient outcomes for single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and evaluate its role in surgical treatment of prostate cancer. This systematic review was structured using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies describing the use of any robotic platform, including da Vinci Si, Xi or SP platforms for robotic single-port or single site radical prostatectomy between 2000 and July 15, 2019 were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Studies were excluded if they included combined cases with other organ resection, represented use in a non-clinical setting (such as a cadaveric model), or described results for a simple prostatectomy technique. Data was extracted by two authors with concerns resolved by consensus. Primary outcomes were mean operative times, estimated blood loss (mL), and hospital length of stay (days). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative conversion to open surgery, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Variables of interest included sample size (n), mean age (years), mean prostate size (mL), prostate specific antigen (PSA, ng/mL), Gleason score, clinical and pathological TNM staging [American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC)], lymph nodes (n) and perioperative complications as available. A total of 217 studies were reviewed by title and abstract, with 28 selected for full-text review; ultimately, 12 studies were included, with available data from 145 patients. Primary outcomes and preoperative characteristics varied greatly amongst patients and across studies. One patient (0.7%) required conversion to a multi-port approach and there were no conversions to an open technique. No intraoperative complications were reported, and no Clavien grade III or greater postoperative complications have been described in the initial 81 radical prostatectomies performed with the SP platform. Single Port techniques appear to represent a safe and feasible approach for performing the minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. The current available literature on the single port radical prostatectomy is weak and consists of single center studies with small sample sizes, short-term follow up and limited functional data. More rigorous multi-center trials with standardized metrics for reporting functional outcomes as well as long-term cancer specific survival are necessary to validate these initial studies. AME Publishing Company 2020-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7215004/ /pubmed/32420205 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.11.05 Text en 2020 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article on Robotic-assisted Urologic Surgery Lai, Andrew Dobbs, Ryan W. Talamini, Susan Halgrimson, Whitney R. Wilson, Jessica O. Vigneswaran, Hari T. Crivellaro, Simone Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title | Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title_full | Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title_short | Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
title_sort | single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review |
topic | Review Article on Robotic-assisted Urologic Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7215004/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32420205 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.11.05 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT laiandrew singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT dobbsryanw singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT talaminisusan singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT halgrimsonwhitneyr singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT wilsonjessicao singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT vigneswaranharit singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview AT crivellarosimone singleportroboticradicalprostatectomyasystematicreview |