Da Vinci and Hugo RAS Platforms for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a preliminary prospective comparative analysis of the outcomes.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Minerva Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-17 DOI:10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05623-4
Esther García Rojo, Vital Hevia Palacios, Ricardo Brime Menendez, Javier A Feltes Ochoa, Juan Justo Quintas, Fernando Lista Mateos, Karim Touijer, Javier Romero Otero
{"title":"Da Vinci and Hugo RAS Platforms for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a preliminary prospective comparative analysis of the outcomes.","authors":"Esther García Rojo, Vital Hevia Palacios, Ricardo Brime Menendez, Javier A Feltes Ochoa, Juan Justo Quintas, Fernando Lista Mateos, Karim Touijer, Javier Romero Otero","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05623-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has emerged as the preferred approach for T1 renal-cell-carcinoma. As new robotic platforms like Hugo RAS emerge, we seek to understand their potential in achieving similar RAPN outcomes as the established Da Vinci system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective single-center comparative study was conducted, and 50 patients selected for RAPN were enrolled (25 Da Vinci Xi; 25 Hugo RAS). The choice of robotic system was based solely on hospital logistics criteria. Surgeries were performed by expert surgeons. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, operative details and postoperative outcomes were collected. SPSS version 22.0 was used for statistical analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average age of patients was 62.52±9.47 years, with no significant differences in median age, sex, and nephrometry scores between groups. Da Vinci group showed a significantly shorter docking time (12.56 vs. 20.08 min; P<0.01), while other intraoperative measures like console time and warm ischemia time were similar. The Hugo RAS group had a shorter renorraphy time (14.33 vs. 18.84 min; P=0.024). Postoperative outcomes and surgical margin positivity showed no significant differences. Each group had one patient (4%) who developed major surgical complications (Clavien IIIa). Trifecta rates were comparable between both groups (Da Vinci 88% vs. Hugo RAS 84%; P=0.93).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initial findings suggest similar perioperative outcomes for RAPN when using Hugo RAS compared to the Da Vinci system. Further research with long-term follow-up is necessary to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"303-311"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05623-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has emerged as the preferred approach for T1 renal-cell-carcinoma. As new robotic platforms like Hugo RAS emerge, we seek to understand their potential in achieving similar RAPN outcomes as the established Da Vinci system.

Methods: A prospective single-center comparative study was conducted, and 50 patients selected for RAPN were enrolled (25 Da Vinci Xi; 25 Hugo RAS). The choice of robotic system was based solely on hospital logistics criteria. Surgeries were performed by expert surgeons. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, operative details and postoperative outcomes were collected. SPSS version 22.0 was used for statistical analyses.

Results: The average age of patients was 62.52±9.47 years, with no significant differences in median age, sex, and nephrometry scores between groups. Da Vinci group showed a significantly shorter docking time (12.56 vs. 20.08 min; P<0.01), while other intraoperative measures like console time and warm ischemia time were similar. The Hugo RAS group had a shorter renorraphy time (14.33 vs. 18.84 min; P=0.024). Postoperative outcomes and surgical margin positivity showed no significant differences. Each group had one patient (4%) who developed major surgical complications (Clavien IIIa). Trifecta rates were comparable between both groups (Da Vinci 88% vs. Hugo RAS 84%; P=0.93).

Conclusions: Initial findings suggest similar perioperative outcomes for RAPN when using Hugo RAS compared to the Da Vinci system. Further research with long-term follow-up is necessary to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于机器人辅助肾部分切除术的达芬奇和雨果 RAS 平台:初步前瞻性结果比较分析。
背景:机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RAPN)已成为治疗T1肾细胞癌的首选方法。随着Hugo RAS等新型机器人平台的出现,我们试图了解它们在实现与成熟的达芬奇系统类似的RAPN结果方面的潜力:方法:我们进行了一项前瞻性单中心比较研究,共选取了50例RAPN患者(25例达芬奇Xi;25例雨果RAS)。机器人系统的选择完全基于医院的后勤标准。手术由专家外科医生实施。收集了人口统计学数据、肿瘤特征、手术细节和术后结果。统计分析采用 SPSS 22.0 版:患者的平均年龄为(62.52±9.47)岁,各组的中位年龄、性别和肾功能评分无明显差异。达芬奇组的对接时间明显更短(12.56 分钟对 20.08 分钟;PC 结论:初步研究结果表明,使用雨果RAS与达芬奇系统相比,RAPN的围手术期结果相似。有必要进一步开展长期随访研究,以评估肿瘤和功能方面的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
期刊最新文献
Modified robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for adult patients with horseshoe kidney: techniques and medium-term outcomes. Partial penectomy with reconstruction using a split-thickness skin graft: a multicenter experience. Robot-assisted retroperitoneoscopic kidney surgery with Versius®. The association between MET c.3328G>A p.Val1110Ile mutation and renal cell carcinomas in a specific population: data on histology, focality, onset and the need for surgery from a monocentric study. Augmentation cystoplasty in children with neuropathic bladder: long-term outcomes after 30 years experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1