Outcomes of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy with the Hugo RAS Surgical System: Initial Experience at a High-volume Robotic Center

Nerve‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy with the HUGO™ robot‐assisted surgery system using the ‘Aalst technique’

“…However, complete data on the learning curve for new adopters is still missing and should be investigated in future studies. With respect to surgical outcomes, optimal perioperative outcomes were achieved, with operative time in line with the literature, no intraoperative complications, and no need for conversions [9]. We did not observe relevant variation in terms of OR and console time compared to our experience with other robotic systems, as well as in terms of overall surgical performance and perioperative outcomes.…”

How experienced robotic nurses adapt to the Hugo™ RAS system

“…The decrease in preoperative time is important as this is often the leading factor in prolonging operative times in robotic surgery [ 14 , 15 ]. As in previous studies, we found a prolongation of perioperative time using the Hugo ™ compared with the Davinci ® [ 16 , 17 ] all in connection with the robotic system itself or unpacking of the sterile gear. Surprisingly, the positioning of the patient was faster for the Hugo ™ even though there should be no difference in this step between the systems.…”

Intraoperative Performance of DaVinci Versus Hugo RAS During Radical Prostatectomy: Focus on Timing, Malfunctioning, Complications, and User Satisfaction in 100 Consecutive Cases (the COMPAR-P Trial)

“…The intraoperative pauses for troubleshooting were mostly due to the mispositioning of the docking ports, which caused collisions of the robotic arms. Dr. Mottrie’s team followed with the publication of more consistent case series, including up to 112 patients, which confirmed the data reported at the start of the experience [19] , [20] . Conversely, just a couple of papers attempted a comparison between the Hugo and DaVinci platforms, although in a retrospective manner.…”