Esther García Rojo, Vital Hevia Palacios, R. Brime Menéndez, J. F. Feltes Ochoa, J. Justo Quintas, F. Lista Mateos, Karim Touijer, J. Romero Otero
{"title":"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。","authors":"Esther García Rojo, Vital Hevia Palacios, R. Brime Menéndez, J. F. Feltes Ochoa, J. Justo Quintas, F. Lista Mateos, Karim Touijer, J. Romero Otero","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05623-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nRobot-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.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA 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.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe 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).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nInitial 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.","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":"2011 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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, R. Brime Menéndez, J. F. Feltes Ochoa, J. Justo Quintas, F. Lista Mateos, Karim Touijer, J. Romero Otero\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05623-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nRobot-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.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nA 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.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nThe 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).\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nInitial 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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\"2011 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"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\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","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":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
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。随着新机器人平台(如 Hugo RAS)的出现,我们试图了解它们在实现与已有的达芬奇系统类似的 RAPN 结果方面的潜力。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。结果患者的平均年龄为(62.52±9.47)岁,组间在中位年龄、性别和肾功能评分方面无明显差异。达芬奇组对接时间明显更短(12.56 分钟对 20.08 分钟;P<0.01),而其他术中指标,如控制台时间和热缺血时间相似。雨果RAS组的肾造影时间更短(14.33分钟对18.84分钟;P=0.024)。术后结果和手术边缘阳性率无显著差异。每组均有一名患者(4%)出现主要手术并发症(Clavien IIIa)。结论初步研究结果表明,与达芬奇系统相比,使用Hugo RAS进行RAPN手术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。
Da Vinci and Hugo RAS Platforms for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a preliminary prospective comparative analysis of the outcomes.
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.