Early outcomes of single-site versus multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:3
|
作者
Yuan, Jiazheng [1 ,2 ]
He, Qinyu [3 ]
Zheng, Yang [2 ,4 ]
Lv, Qian [2 ]
Hu, Xu [5 ]
Wang, Dong [2 ]
Tian, Jingzhi [2 ]
Ren, Shangqing [2 ]
机构
[1] Chengdu Med Coll, Chengdu 610500, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Elect Sci & Technol China, Sichuan Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Robot Minimally Invas Surg Ctr, Sch Med, Chengdu 610072, Peoples R China
[3] Univ Elect Sci & Technol China, Sichuan Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Operat Management, Chengdu 610072, Peoples R China
[4] Univ Elect Sci & Technol China, Sch Med, Chengdu 610054, Peoples R China
[5] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp, Inst Urol, Dept Urol, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
来源
EJSO | 2024年 / 50卷 / 01期
关键词
Single site; Single incision; Multi-port; Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy; Early outcomes; PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES; PORT; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107263
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Single-site robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (ssRARP) has been promoted in many institutions due to its minimally invasive approach. This review aimed to investigate early outcomes of ssRARP in comparison with multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (mpRARP). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed for articles related to ssRARP case series and studies that compared ssRARP with mpRARP. The primary outcomes were functional and oncological outcomes, incision length, length of hospital stay and cost. Results: 24 ssRARP case series involving 1385 cases, and 11 comparative studies involving 573 ssRARP cases and 980 mpRARP cases were included. Rate of immediate, 3-month, 6-month and 12-month recovery of continence in the ssRARP case series were 41 % [95 % CI: 0.38-0.45], 70 % [95 % CI: 0.67-0.73], 90 % [95 % CI: 0.87-0.93] and 93 % [95 % CI: 0.90-0.96]. 3-month potency recovery and positive surgical margin rate were 53 % [95 % CI: 0.46-0.60] and 21 % [95 % CI: 0.19-0.24]. No significant differences were detected between ssRARP and mpRARP in terms of 3-month (OR: 1.12; 95 % CI: 0.80-1.57) or 6-month (OR: 0.72; 95 % CI: 0.36-1.46) continence recovery rate, 3-month potency recovery rate (OR: 0.92; 95 % CI: 0.50-1.70), positive surgical margin rate (OR: 0.83; 95 % CI: 0.62-1.11), biochemical recurrence rate or total cost. Furthermore, ssRARP was associated with a significantly shorter length of incision and hospital stay. Conclusion: ssRARP has significant advantages in cosmetic effect, length of incision and rapid recovery. Consequently, ssRARP is expected to become the preferred form although more evidence is needed to determine its long-term effect.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Perioperative Outcomes of Single vs Multi-Port Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Single Institutional Experience
    Thompson, James E.
    Stricker, Phillip D.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 204 (03): : 495 - 495
  • [22] Robotic versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Anastasia Prodromidou
    Eleftherios Spartalis
    Gerasimos Tsourouflis
    Dimitrios Dimitroulis
    Nikolaos Nikiteas
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2020, 14 : 679 - 686
  • [23] Robotic versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Prodromidou, Anastasia
    Spartalis, Eleftherios
    Tsourouflis, Gerasimos
    Dimitroulis, Dimitrios
    Nikiteas, Nikolaos
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2020, 14 (05) : 679 - 686
  • [24] PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES BETWEEN SINGLE-PORT AND MULTI-PORT ROBOTIC ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A SINGLE INSTITUTIONAL EXPERIENCE
    Saidian, Ava
    Fang, Andrew
    Hakim, Ornin
    Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina
    Nix, Jeffrey
    Rais-Bahrami, Soroush
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 : E900 - E901
  • [25] Single port robotic radical prostatectomy versus multi-port robotic radical prostatectomy: A human factor analysis during the initial learning curve
    Talamini, Susan
    Halgrimson, Whitney R.
    Dobbs, Ryan W.
    Morana, Carmelo
    Crivellaro, Simone
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2021, 17 (02):
  • [26] Technical advancements in robotic prostatectomy: single-port extraperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and single-port transperineal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Aminsharifi, Alireza
    Sawczyn, Guilherme
    Wilson, Clark A.
    Garisto, Juan
    Kaouk, Jihad
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2020, 9 (02) : 848 - 855
  • [27] Single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Thanawiboonchai, Theethawat
    Cyntia Lima Fonseca Rodrigues, Amanda
    Zevallos, Alba
    Shojaeian, Fatemeh
    Parker, Brett Colton
    Coker, Alisa Mae
    Deng, Hao
    Adrales, Gina Lynn
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 39 (01): : 530 - 544
  • [28] Single-site port robotic-assisted hysterectomy: an update
    Iavazzo C.
    Minis E.E.
    Gkegkes I.D.
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2018, 12 (2) : 201 - 213
  • [29] Robotic single-site versus multi-port myomectomy: a case–control study
    So Hyun Ahn
    Joo Hyun Park
    Hye Rim Kim
    SiHyun Cho
    Myeongjee Lee
    Seok Kyo Seo
    Young Sik Choi
    Byung Seok Lee
    BMC Surgery, 21
  • [30] Surgical and functional outcomes of Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus conventional robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer. Are outcomes worth it? Systematic review and meta-analysis
    O'Connor-Cordova, Mario A.
    Macias, Alan Gabriel Ortega
    Sancen-Herrera, Juan Pablo
    Altamirano-Lamarque, Francisco
    Vargas del Toro, Alexis
    Peddinani, Bharat Kumar
    Canal-Zarate, Pia
    O'Connor-Juarez, Mario A.
    PROSTATE, 2023, 83 (15): : 1395 - 1414