Initial Experience and Surgical Setup of Robot-Assisted Nephroureterectomy Using the Hugo Robot-Assisted Surgery System.

Introduction and Hypothesis: Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy (RANU) has emerged as a valid alternative to open or laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in recent years. However, different types of robotic platforms can limit surgical maneuvers in various ways. This study aimed to describe the surgical procedure and demonstrate RANU's technical feasibility and safety using the Hugo robot-assisted surgery (RAS) system. Materials and Methods: Using the Hugo RAS system, we reported data from the first five consecutive patients who underwent RANU at Tottori University Hospital. We adjusted the docking angles of the four independent arm carts in each case and performed a complete RANU via a transperitoneal approach. We collected patients' sociodemographic and perioperative data, including complications, and compared them retrospectively with data obtained using the da Vinci surgical system. Results: Arms positions were modified after the first patient to be placed all at the back of the patient. Median overall operative time was 283 minutes (203-377) and the median time using the robotic system was 187 minutes (121-277). The median estimated blood loss was 20 mL (5-155). None of the patients required a blood transfusion and none suffered postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3. These outcomes were similar to those obtained with the da Vinci Xi system. Conclusion: This series represents the first report of RANU executed using the novel Hugo RAS system. Our proposed arm-setup will assist other surgeons and help ensure safe implementation of RANU on the Hugo platform.

Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Performed with Different Robotic Platforms: First Comparative Evidence Between Da Vinci and HUGO Robot-assisted Surgery Robots.

BACKGROUND: In the field of robotic surgery, there is a lack of comparative evidence on surgical and functional outcomes of different robotic platforms. OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of patients receiving robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) at a high-volume robotic center with daVinci and HUGO robot-assisted surgery (RAS) surgical systems. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed the data of 542 patients undergoing RARP ± extended pelvic lymph node dissection at OLV hospital (Aalst, Belgium) between 2021 and 2023. All procedures were performed by six surgeons using daVinci or HUGO RAS robots; the use of one platform rather than the other did not follow any specific preference and/or indication. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable analyses investigated the association between robotic system (daVinci vs HUGO RAS) and surgical outcomes after adjustment for patient- and tumor-related factors. Urinary continence recovery was defined as the use of no/one safety pad. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 378 (70%) and 164 (30%) patients underwent RARP with daVinci and HUGO RAS surgical systems, respectively. Despite a higher rate of palpable disease in the HUGO RAS group (34% vs 25%), baseline characteristics did not differ between the groups (all p > 0.05). After adjusting for confounders, we did not find evidence of a difference between the groups with respect to operative time (estimate: 16.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.35, 39.78; p = 0.12), estimated blood loss (estimate: 3.12; 95% CI: -67.03, 73.27; p = 0.9), and postoperative Clavien-Dindo ≥2 complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.66; 95% CI: 0.34, 8.15; p = 0.5). On final pathology, 55 (15%) and 20 (12%) men in, respectively, the daVinci and the HUGO RAS group had positive surgical margins (PSMs; p = 0.5). On multivariable analyses, we did not find evidence of an association between a robotic system and PSMs (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.56, 2.07; p = 0.8). Similarly, the odds of recovering continence did not differ between daVinci and HUGO RAS cases after both 1 mo (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.38; p = 0.4) and 3 mo (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.49, 2.79; p = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving RARP with daVinci or HUGO RAS surgical platforms, we did not find differences in surgical and functional outcomes between the robots. This may be a result of a standardized surgical technique that allowed surgeons to transfer their skills between robotic systems. Awaiting future investigations with longer follow-up, these results have important implications for patients, surgeons, and health care policymakers. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared surgical and functional outcomes of patients receiving robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with daVinci versus HUGO robot-assisted surgery (RAS) robots. The two platforms were able to achieve similar outcomes, suggesting that the introduction of HUGO RAS is safe and allows for optimal outcomes after radical prostatectomy.

Robotic inguinal hernia repair with the new Hugo RASTM system: first worldwide case series report.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted surgery has been a part of surgical procedures for more than two decades. Recently new robotic platforms with a different design entered the market. The modular design with independent arms enables increased flexibility of arm docking to increase the range of motion and instrument maneuverability. We herein present the first case series of robotic inguinal hernia repair using the Hugo RAS system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirteen inguinal hernia repairs were performed on ten patients. A description of the Hugo RAS system as well as the new concept of modular design is presented along with the description of the operation setup. RESULTS: Mean docking time was 9.5 min and mean console time was 50.3 min and 74.7 min for unilateral and bilateral inguinal hernia repair, respectively. No intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. There was one conversion to laparoscopic surgery due to a technical issue with the robot. Conclusions: The modular design of independent arms seems to enhance maneuverability of the instruments and contribute to fewer arm collisions. Further clinical data and experience with this new surgical system are necessary to understand if this new design has advantages over the standard robotic platforms.