Biophotonics-Intraoperative Guidance During Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Partial nephrectomy (PN) with intraoperative guidance by biophotonics has the potential to improve surgical outcomes due to higher precision. However, its value remains unclear since high-level evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive analysis of biophotonic techniques used for intraoperative real-time assistance during PN. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a comprehensive database search based on the PICO criteria, including studies published before October 2022. Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts followed by full-text screening of eligible studies. For a quantitative analysis, a meta-analysis was conducted. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 35 studies were identified for the qualitative analysis, including 27 studies on near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging using indocyanine green, four studies on hyperspectral imaging, two studies on folate-targeted molecular imaging, and one study each on optical coherence tomography and 5-aminolevulinic acid. The meta-analysis investigated seven studies on selective arterial clamping using NIRF. There was a significantly shorter warm ischemia time in the NIRF-PN group (mean difference [MD]: -2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.6, -0.1; p = 0.04). No differences were noted regarding transfusions (odds ratio [OR]: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2, 1.7; p = 0.27), positive surgical margins (OR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.2, 2.0; p = 0.46), or major complications (OR: 0.4; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.2; p = 0.08). In the NIRF-PN group, functional results were favorable at short-term follow-up (MD of glomerular filtration rate decline: 7.6; 95% CI: 4.6, 10.5; p < 0.01), but leveled off at long-term follow-up (MD: 7.0; 95% CI: -2.8, 16.9; p = 0.16). Remarkably, these findings were not confirmed by the included randomized controlled trial. CONCLUSIONS: Biophotonics comprises a heterogeneous group of imaging modalities that serve intraoperative decision-making and guidance. Implementation into clinical practice and cost effectiveness are the limitations that should be addressed by future research. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the application of biophotonics during partial removal of the kidney in patients with kidney cancer. Our results suggest that these techniques support the surgeon in successfully performing the challenging steps of the procedure.

Framework for a living systematic review and meta-analysis for the surgical treatment of bladder cancer: introducing EVIglance to urology.

Background: Knowledge of current and ongoing studies is critical for identifying research gaps and enabling evidence-based decisions for individualized treatment. However, the increasing number of scientific publications poses challenges for healthcare providers and patients in all medical fields to stay updated with the latest evidence. To overcome these barriers, we aim to develop a living systematic review and open-access online evidence map of surgical therapy for bladder cancer (BC), including meta-analyses. Methods: Following the guidelines provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement, a systematic literature search on uro-oncological therapy in BC will be performed across various literature databases. Within the scope of a meta-analysis and living systematic review, relevant randomized controlled trials will be identified. Data extraction and quantitative analysis will be conducted, along with a critical appraisal of the quality and risk of bias of each study. The available research evidence will be entered into an open-access framework (www.evidencemap.surgery) and will also be accessible via the EVIglance app. Regular semi-automatic updates will enable the implementation of a real-living review concept and facilitate resource-efficient screening. Discussion: A regularly updated evidence map provides professionals and patients with an open-access knowledge base on the current state of research, allowing for decision-making based on recent evidence. It will help identify an oversupply of evidence, thus avoiding redundant work. Furthermore, by identifying research gaps, new hypotheses can be formulated more precisely, enabling planning, determination of sample size, and definition of endpoints for future trials.

Robot-assisted versus three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 12-month outcomes of a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare functional and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) to three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (3D-LRP) at 12 months after surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomised single-centre study of 145 consecutive men referred to radical prostatectomy in a tertiary referral centre in Finland. Patients were randomised 1:1 to the RALP (N = 75) and 3D-LRP (N = 70) groups. The primary outcome was urinary continence evaluated with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26-item version (EPIC-26) incontinence domain score at 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the use of protective pads at 12 months after surgery, EPIC-26 domain scores of irritative/obstructive, bowel, sexual and hormonal symptoms, positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Complication frequency within the 3-month period after surgery was evaluated according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Statistical significance between groups was analysed using Mann-Whitney, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. The trial was terminated after interim analysis based on no statistically significant difference in EPIC-26 urinary incontinence domain scores. Altogether 145 patients of the target accrual of 280 patients were recruited. RESULTS: Postoperative continence at 12 months after surgery according to the EPIC-26 incontinence domain was 79.25 in both groups (P = 0.4). Between group difference was -5.8 (95% confidence interval -15.2 to 3.6). There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of PSM or BCR between the two surgical modality groups. CONCLUSION: We were unable to demonstrate a difference between the RALP and 3D-LRP groups for functional and oncological outcomes at 12 months after surgery.

Crossover-effects in technical skills between laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Robot-assisted surgery is often performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. However, this technique requires a different set of technical skills and surgeons are expected to alternate between these approaches. The aim of this study is to investigate the crossover effects when switching between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery. METHODS: An international multicentre crossover study was conducted. Trainees with distinctly different levels of experience were divided into three groups (novice, intermediate, expert). Each trainee performed six trials of a standardized suturing task using a laparoscopic box trainer and six trials using the da Vinci surgical robot. Both systems were equipped with the ForceSense system, measuring five force-based parameters for objective assessment of tissue handling skills. Statistical comparison was done between the sixth and seventh trial to identify transition effects. Unexpected changes in parameter outcomes after the seventh trial were further investigated. RESULTS: A total of 720 trials, performed by 60 participants, were analysed. The expert group increased their tissue handling forces with 46% (maximum impulse 11.5 N/s to 16.8 N/s, p = 0.05), when switching from robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopy. When switching from laparoscopy to robot-assisted surgery, intermediates and experts significantly decreased in motion efficiency (time (sec), resp. 68 vs. 100, p = 0.05, and 44 vs. 84, p = 0.05). Further investigation between the seventh and ninth trial showed that the intermediate group increased their force exertion with 78% (5.1 N vs. 9.1 N, p = 0.04), when switching to robot-assisted surgery. CONCLUSION: The crossover effects in technical skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery are highly depended on the prior experience with laparoscopic surgery. Where experts can alternate between approaches without impairment of technical skills, novices and intermediates should be aware of decay in efficiency of movement and tissue handling skills that could impact patient safety. Therefore, additional simulation training is advised to prevent from undesired events.

Development of biotissue training models for anastomotic suturing in pancreatic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic suturing is the Achilles heel of pancreatic surgery. Especially in laparoscopic and robotically assisted surgery, the pancreatic anastomosis should first be trained outside the operating room. Realistic training models are therefore needed. METHODS: Models of the pancreas, small bowel, stomach, bile duct, and a realistic training torso were developed for training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery. Pancreas models with soft and hard textures, small and large ducts were incrementally developed and evaluated. Experienced pancreatic surgeons (n = 44) evaluated haptic realism, rigidity, fragility of tissues, and realism of suturing and knot tying. RESULTS: In the iterative development process the pancreas models showed high haptic realism and highest realism in suturing (4.6 ± 0.7 and 4.9 ± 0.5 on 1-5 Likert scale, soft pancreas). The small bowel model showed highest haptic realism (4.8 ± 0.4) and optimal wall thickness (0.1 ± 0.4 on -2 to +2 Likert scale) and suturing behavior (0.1 ± 0.4). The bile duct models showed optimal wall thickness (0.3 ± 0.8 and 0.4 ± 0.8 on -2 to +2 Likert scale) and optimal tissue fragility (0 ± 0.9 and 0.3 ± 0.7). CONCLUSION: The biotissue training models showed high haptic realism and realistic suturing behavior. They are suitable for realistic training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery which may improve patient outcomes.

Force-based assessment of tissue handling skills in simulation training for robot-assisted surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Although robotic-assisted surgery is increasingly performed, objective assessment of technical skills is lacking. The aim of this study is to provide validity evidence for objective assessment of technical skills for robotic-assisted surgery. METHODS: An international multicenter study was conducted with participants from the academic hospitals Heidelberg University Hospital (Germany, Heidelberg) and the Amsterdam University Medical Centers (The Netherlands, Amsterdam). Trainees with distinctly different levels of robotic surgery experience were divided into three groups (novice, intermediate, expert) and enrolled in a training curriculum. Each trainee performed six trials of a standardized suturing task using the da Vinci Surgical System. Using the ForceSense system, five force-based parameters were analyzed, for objective assessment of tissue handling skills. Mann-Whitney U test and linear regression were used to analyze performance differences and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to analyze skills progression. RESULTS: A total of 360 trials, performed by 60 participants, were analyzed. Significant differences between the novices, intermediates and experts were observed regarding the total completion time (41 s vs 29 s vs 22 s p = 0.003), mean non zero force (29 N vs 33 N vs 19 N p = 0.032), maximum impulse (40 Ns vs 31 Ns vs 20 Ns p = 0.001) and force volume (38 N3 vs 32 N3 vs 22 N3 p = 0.018). Furthermore, the experts showed better results in mean non-zero force (22 N vs 13 N p = 0.015), maximum impulse (24 Ns vs 17 Ns p = 0.043) and force volume (25 N3 vs 16 N3 p = 0.025) compared to the intermediates (p ≤ 0.05). Lastly, learning curve improvement was observed for the total task completion time, mean non-zero force, maximum impulse and force volume (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: Construct validity for force-based assessment of tissue handling skills in robot-assisted surgery is established. It is advised to incorporate objective assessment and feedback in robot-assisted surgery training programs to determine technical proficiency and, potentially, to prevent tissue trauma.

Robotic-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Cystectomy-A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

CONTEXT: Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the three approaches of radical cystectomy (robotic assisted [RARC], laparoscopic [LRC], and open [ORC]) have been published recently. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs comparing RARC, LRC, and ORC, with the primary outcomes being overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Web of Science (last search: 20/05/2022) was performed. The prospectively registered protocol stated that a NMA of the primary outcomes would be performed only if there was sufficient evidence to compare all three approaches. In case of insufficient evidence, a comparison between the two most common approaches would be performed. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence (CoE) via the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was assessed for direct evidence and the most common comparison. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Ten trials were identified. There was insufficient evidence for a NMA of all approaches for the primary outcomes. The meta-analysis of RARC and ORC showed no differences in OS (hazard ratio (HR) [confidence interval (CI): 0.98 [0.73-1.30]) and RFS (HR [CI]: 0.99 [0.75-1.31]) with moderate CoE. The secondary outcomes showed lower rates of transfusions (p < 0.01) and longer operating time (p < 0.01) with high CoE for RARC compared with ORC. There were no differences for quality of life, positive margins, length of hospital stay, or major complications (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There are no differences in OS and RFS between RARC and ORC, with moderate CoE. Clinicians should likely apply the approach with which they can reach the highest case volume and in which they have the most experience. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at the difference between three types (robotic assisted, laparoscopic, and open) of operating techniques for radical cystectomy. The data showed no significant differences in OS between the robotic-assisted and the open technique, while enough data were not available to make a comparison with conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Systemic inflammatory biomarkers as predictive and prognostic factors in men with metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer treated with docetaxel therapy: a comprehensive analysis in a German real-world cohort.

PURPOSE: Advances in therapy of metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer (mCRPC) resulted in more therapeutic options and led to a higher need of predictive/prognostic biomarkers. Systemic inflammatory biomarkers could provide the basis for personalized treatment selection. This study aimed to assess the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS), the neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) in men with mCRPC under docetaxel. METHODS: Patients with mCRPC and taxane chemotherapy at a tertiary care centre between 2010 and 2019 were screened retrospectively. The biomarkers mGPS, NLR, PLR and SII were assessed and analyzed for biochemical/radiologic response and survival. RESULTS: We included 118 patients. Of these, 73 (61.9%) had received docetaxel as first-line, 31 (26.2%) as second-line and 14 (11.9%) as third-line treatment. For biochemical response, mGPS (odds ratio (OR) 0.54, p = 0.04) and PLR (OR 0.63, p = 0.04) were independent predictors in multivariable analysis. SII was significant in first-line cohort only (OR 0.29, p = 0.02). No inflammatory marker was predictive for radiologic response. In multivariable analysis, mGPS and NLR (hazard ratio (HR) 1.71 and 1.12, both p < 0.01) showed significant association with OS in total cohort and mGPS in the first-line cohort (HR 2.23, p < 0.01). Haemoglobin (Hb) and alkaline phosphatase (AP) showed several significant associations regarding 1 year, 3 year, OS and biochemical/radiologic response. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-treatment mGPS seems a promising prognostic biomarker. A combination of mGPS, NLR and further routine markers (e.g., Hb and AP) could yield optimized stratification for treatment selection. Further prospective and multicentric assessment is needed.

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy vs Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Trials.

Context: Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) are two minimally invasive alternatives to simple prostatectomy, which is considered the standard treatment in large prostate glands. It remains unclear which of the two is superior in terms of outcome and complications. Objective: To compare perioperative and functional outcomes of RASP vs EEP. Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and in line with the PRISMA criteria. The database search included clinicaltrials.gov, Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL, and Web of Science and was using the PICO criteria. All comparative trials were considered. Risk of bias was assessed with the revised ROBINS-I tool. Evidence Synthesis: Seven hundred sixty studies were identified, 4 of which were eligible for qualitative and quantitative analysis, reporting on a total of 901 patients with follow-up up to 24 months. Hemoglobin drop (mean difference [MD] confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 g/dL [0.09-0.58]), the rate of blood transfusions (odds ratio [OR] [CI]: 5.01 [1.60-15.61]) catheterization time (MD [CI]: 3.26 days [1.30-5.23]), and length of hospital stay (LoS) (MD [CI]: 1.94 days [1.11-2.76]) were significantly lower in EEP. No significant differences were seen in operating time and enucleation weight. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of postoperative urinary retention, postoperative transient incontinence, and complications graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Functional results were similar, with no significant differences in International Prostate Symptom Score and maximum urinary flow rate at follow-up. Conclusion: Both EEP and RASP offer excellent improvement of symptoms due to prostatic hyperplasia. EEP has lower blood loss, shorter catheterization time, and LoS and should be the first choice if available. RASP remains an attractive alternative for extremely large glands, in concomitant diseases, or whenever EEP is not available. Review Registration Number (PROSPERO): CRD42021226901.

Development and validity evidence of an objective structured assessment of technical skills score for minimally invasive linear-stapled, hand-sewn intestinal anastomoses: the A-OSATS score.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to develop a reliable objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) score for linear-stapled, hand-sewn closure of enterotomy intestinal anastomoses (A-OSATS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Delphi methodology was used to create a traditional and weighted A-OSATS score highlighting the more important steps for patient outcomes according to an international expert consensus. Minimally invasive novices, intermediates, and experts were asked to perform a minimally invasive linear-stapled intestinal anastomosis with hand-sewn closure of the enterotomy in a live animal model either laparoscopically or robot-assisted. Video recordings were scored by two blinded raters assessing intrarater and interrater reliability and discriminative abilities between novices (n = 8), intermediates (n = 24), and experts (n = 8). RESULTS: The Delphi process included 18 international experts and was successfully completed after 4 rounds. A total of 4 relevant main steps as well as 15 substeps were identified and a definition of each substep was provided. A maximum of 75 points could be reached in the unweighted A-OSATS score and 170 points in the weighted A-OSATS score respectively. A total of 41 anastomoses were evaluated. Excellent intrarater (r = 0.807-0.988, p < 0.001) and interrater (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.923-0.924, p < 0.001) reliability was demonstrated. Both versions of the A-OSATS correlated well with the general OSATS and discriminated between novices, intermediates, and experts defined by their OSATS global rating scale. CONCLUSION: With the weighted and unweighted A-OSATS score, we propose a new reliable standard to assess the creation of minimally invasive linear-stapled, hand-sewn anastomoses based on an international expert consensus. Validity evidence in live animal models is provided in this study. Future research should focus on assessing whether the weighted A-OSATS exceeds the predictive capabilities of patient outcomes of the unweighted A-OSATS and provide further validity evidence on using the score on different anastomotic techniques in humans.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open liver resection.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The dissemination of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been based on non-randomized studies and reviews of these. Aim of this study was to evaluate if the randomized evidence comparing LLR to open liver resection (OLR) supports these findings. METHODS: A prospectively registered (reviewregistry866) systematic review and meta-analysis following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines comparing LLR to OLR for benign and malignant diseases was performed via Medline, Web of Science, CENTRAL up to 31.12.2020. The main outcome was postoperative complications. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0, certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: The search yielded 2080 results. 13 RCTs assessing mostly minor liver resections with 1457 patients were included. There were reduced odds of experiencing any complication (Odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0·42 [0·30, 0·58]) and severe complications (OR[CI]: 0·51 [0·31, 0·84]) for patients undergoing LLR. LOS was shorter (Mean difference (MD) [CI]: -2·90 [-3·88, -1·92] days), blood loss was lower (MD: [CI]: -115·41 [-146·08, -84·75] ml), and functional recovery was better for LLR. All other outcomes showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: LLR shows significant postoperative benefits. RCTs assessing long-term outcomes and major resections are needed.