Perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of Da Vinci vs. Hugo RAS for robot‑assisted radical prostatectomy: evidence based on controlled studies.
Li Wang, Jian-Wei Yang, Xiaoran Li, Kun-Peng Li, Shun Wan, Si-Yu Chen, Li Yang
{"title":"Perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of Da Vinci vs. Hugo RAS for robot‑assisted radical prostatectomy: evidence based on controlled studies.","authors":"Li Wang, Jian-Wei Yang, Xiaoran Li, Kun-Peng Li, Shun Wan, Si-Yu Chen, Li Yang","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02146-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A comparison was conducted between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed using the Hugo RAS System and the Da Vinci System. We conducted an extensive search of online databases through September 2024. The data from eligible studies were pooled and analyzed with Review Manager 5.4, employing a random effects model. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to analyze continuous and categorical variables. A total of eight original studies, involving 1155 patients (HUGO-RARP: 468 vs. da Vinci-RARP: 687), were included. Compared with da Vinci-RARP, HUGO-RARP had a longer docking time (WMD: 6.2 min; 95% CI 4.25-8.14; p < 0.0001), while no significant differences were observed in total operative time, console time, bladder neck dissection time, seminal vesicle dissection time, vesicourethral anastomosis time, or pelvic lymph node dissection time between two systems. There were no significant differences in hospital stay, estimated blood loss, catheter duration, or complication rates. Likewise, oncological and functional outcomes were similar between the two systems. While these results suggest that the Hugo RAS system performs as well as the Da Vinci system in RARP, more randomized controlled studies are needed to further evaluate prognostic outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"379"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02146-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A comparison was conducted between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed using the Hugo RAS System and the Da Vinci System. We conducted an extensive search of online databases through September 2024. The data from eligible studies were pooled and analyzed with Review Manager 5.4, employing a random effects model. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to analyze continuous and categorical variables. A total of eight original studies, involving 1155 patients (HUGO-RARP: 468 vs. da Vinci-RARP: 687), were included. Compared with da Vinci-RARP, HUGO-RARP had a longer docking time (WMD: 6.2 min; 95% CI 4.25-8.14; p < 0.0001), while no significant differences were observed in total operative time, console time, bladder neck dissection time, seminal vesicle dissection time, vesicourethral anastomosis time, or pelvic lymph node dissection time between two systems. There were no significant differences in hospital stay, estimated blood loss, catheter duration, or complication rates. Likewise, oncological and functional outcomes were similar between the two systems. While these results suggest that the Hugo RAS system performs as well as the Da Vinci system in RARP, more randomized controlled studies are needed to further evaluate prognostic outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.