Introduction Robot-assisted surgery is becoming increasingly adopted by multiple surgical specialties. There is evidence of inherent risks of utilising new technologies that are unfamiliar early in the learning curve. The development of standardised and validated training programmes is crucial to deliver safe introduction. In this review, we aim to evaluate the current evidence and opportunities to integrate novel technologies into modern digitalised robotic training curricula. Methods A systematic literature review of the current evidence for novel technologies in surgical training was conducted online and relevant publications and information were identified. Evaluation was made on how these technologies could further enable digitalisation of training. Results Overall, the quality of available studies was found to be low with current available evidence consisting largely of expert opinion, consensus statements and small qualitative studies. The review identified that there are several novel technologies already being utilised in robotic surgery training. There is also a trend towards standardised validated robotic training curricula. Currently, the majority of the validated curricula do not incorporate novel technologies and training is delivered with more traditional methods that includes centralisation of training services with wet laboratories that have access to cadavers and dedicated training robots. Conclusions Improvements to training standards and understanding performance data have good potential to significantly lower complications in patients. Digitalisation automates data collection and brings data together for analysis. Machine learning has potential to develop automated performance feedback for trainees. Digitalised training aims to build on the current gold standards and to further improve the ‘continuum of training’ by integrating PBP training, 3D-printed models, telementoring, telemetry and machine learning.

PurposeThis study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes and surgical complications of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) treated with different minimally invasive techniques for nephroureterectomy.MethodsFrom the updated data of the Taiwan UTUC Collaboration Group, a total of 3,333 UTUC patients were identified. After excluding ineligible cases, we retrospectively included 1,340 patients from 15 institutions who received hand-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (HALNU), laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU) or robotic nephroureterectomy (RNU) between 2001 and 2021. Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazards model were used to analyze the survival outcomes, and binary logistic regression model was selected to compare the risks of postoperative complications of different surgical approaches.ResultsAmong the enrolled patients, 741, 458 and 141 patients received HALNU, LNU and RNU, respectively. Compared with RNU (41.1%) and LNU (32.5%), the rate of lymph node dissection in HALNU was the lowest (17.4%). In both Kaplan-Meier and univariate analysis, the type of surgery was significantly associated with overall and cancer-specific survival. The statistical significance of surgical methods on survival outcomes remained in multivariate analysis, where patients undergoing HALNU appeared to have the worst overall (p = 0.007) and cancer-specific (p = 0.047) survival rates among the three groups. In all analyses, the surgical approach was not related to bladder recurrence. In addition, HALNU was significantly associated with longer hospital stay (p = 0.002), and had the highest risk of major Clavien-Dindo complications (p = 0.011), paralytic ileus (p = 0.012), and postoperative end-stage renal disease (p <0.001).ConclusionsMinimally invasive surgery can be safe and feasible. We proved that compared with the HALNU group, the LNU and RNU groups have better survival rates and fewer surgical complications. It is crucial to uphold strict oncological principles with sophisticated technique to improve outcomes. Further prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the cancellation or deferment of many elective cancer surgeries. We performed a systematic review on the oncological effects of delayed surgery for patients with localised or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the targeted therapy (TT) era. Method The protocol of this review is registered on PROSPERO(CRD42020190882). A comprehensive literature search was performed on Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL using MeSH terms and keywords for randomised controlled trials and observational studies on the topic. Risks of biases were assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For localised RCC, immediate surgery [including partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN)] and delayed surgery [including active surveillance (AS) and delayed intervention (DI)] were compared. For metastatic RCC, upfront versus deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) were compared. Results Eleven studies were included for quantitative analysis. Delayed surgery was significantly associated with worse cancer-specific survival (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23-2.27, p < 0.01) in T1a RCC, but no significant difference was noted for overall survival. For localised ≥ T1b RCC, there were insufficient data for meta-analysis and the results from the individual reports were contradictory. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN was associated with better overall survival when compared to upfront CN followed by deferred TT (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.86, p < 0.001). Conclusion Noting potential selection bias, there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that delayed surgery is safe in localised RCC. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN should be considered.