Single plus one port robotic radical prostatectomy (SPORP); Initial experience

Tuğcu, Volkan; Şimşek, Abdülmuttalip; Evren, İ̇smail; Şeker, Kamil Gökhan; Kocakaya, Ramazan; Törer, Buğra Doğukan; Atar, Arda; Taşçı, Ali İhsan

doi:10.4081/aiua.2017.3.178

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Before the advent of the da Vinci SP robot the concept of single-access surgery had been explored with the multiport robot. Some authors described the single-access surgery using a multiport robot with the arms placed together through one incision or port [9,10]. However, the technical challenges associated with clashing of the bulky arms led to limited utility and benefit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early outcomes of single‐port robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: lessons learned from the learning‐curve experience

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To describe the crucial factors related to the implementation of the da Vinci single-port (SP) system (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA), and the early outcomes after the introduction of this robot for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Patients and methods We prospectively collected data from 50 consecutive patients with prostate adenocarcinoma who underwent RARP using this robot. The median follow-up was 53 days. We performed a transperitoneal technique. The robotic (multiport) trocar was placed on the supra-umbilical midline 20 cm from the pubis and an assistant trocar placed in the right lower quadrant. We report our initial experience describing the intra-and postoperative outcomes associated with this new robot. Also, we report the early functional and oncological outcomes in the follow-up period considered. Continuous variables were described as medians and interquartile ranges, while categorical variables as frequencies and proportions. Results The median total operative time was 118 min, median console time was 80 min, and median estimated blood loss was 50 mL. There were no intraoperative complications or blood transfusions. The final pathology reported 18% Grade Group (GrGp)1, 58% GrGp2, 18% GrGp3, 2% GrGp4, and 4% GrGp5. In all, 40 patients (80%) were pT2 and 20% were ≥pT3a. The overall positive surgical margin rate was 14%. In all, 39 patients (78%) achieved full continence at median of 21 days after RARP. The median pain scale (0-10) score at 8, 12 and 16 h after RARP was 2, 2, and 0, respectively. Conclusion The use of the da Vinci SP robot with an additional assistant port for RARP is technically safe and feasible, with acceptable short-term functional and oncological outcomes. However, there is a technical learning curve for this new platform due to the smaller scope of the operative field and the decreased flexibility and strength of the surgical instruments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early outcomes of single‐port robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: lessons learned from the learning‐curve experience

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several authors reported Robot LESS [28][29][30][31]. However, it is necessary to buy new da Vinci surgical system for single-port surgery only.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Port Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Araki¹,

Naya²

2019

Prostatectomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is more popular than laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in twenty-first century. However, RALP is still an expensive surgery. Open radical prostatectomy (ORP) was a gold standard and not an expensive surgery. However, ORP is not minimum invasive. LRP is relative expensive and minimum invasive. The problem of RALP or LRP is necessary to spread the wound for removing prostate and the pain of wound is often a problem. Using U-shaped incision at umbilicus, spreading the wound is not necessary to remove prostate. Single-port surgery is a challenging procedure for surgeons in spite of faster recovery and higher patient satisfaction than conventional laparoscopy. Adding one or two port, reduced port surgery is easier than single-port surgery. Reduced port LRP is an extension of conventional LRP. The procedure is as same as conventional LRP. Curved or flexible instruments are not always necessary in the reduced port LRP. Reduced port LRP has less pain and better cosmetics than conventional LRP because the prostate is removed from the umbilicus. It is not necessary to spread the wound for removing prostate.

show abstract