Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Utilizing Hugo RAS Platform: Initial Experience.

Background: The Hugo RAS™ is a newly launched robotic system for clinical use. This article provides the initial outcomes of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with Hugo RAS. It also attempts to compare the outcomes with a similar set of patients undergoing the procedure with the DaVinci robotic systems. Methodology: Patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for biopsy-proven prostate cancer were included in this study. Institutional ethical approval was obtained, and patients were counseled preoperatively with informed consent. Both intra- and postoperative data were carefully recorded for the Hugo RAS. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy in DaVinci robotic systems during a similar period were chosen to compare the outcomes of the Hugo systems in a nonrandomized study. Results: A total of 34 patients were included in this study wherein 17 radical prostatectomies were done in the Hugo RAS system and 17 in the DaVinci system were chosen to compare. The total operative time (210 vs 195 minutes) and dock time (190 vs 170 minutes) were similar between the two groups. An R0 or R1 resection and vesicourethral anastomosis were achieved in all cases. There were no notable intra- or postoperative complications in up to 1-month follow-up. Conclusion: The authors believe that the Hugo RAS platform is a safe robotic system for pelvic procedures such as radical prostatectomy, provides comparable results with existing robotic systems, and is a good addition to the existing arsenal of surgical robots.

Evaluation of Hugo RAS System in Major Urologic Surgery: Our Initial Experience.

Background: The Hugo RAS is a newly launched robotic system for clinical use. This article provides the initial experience of the authors using Hugo RAS in urologic procedures. Methodology: Patients undergoing major urologic procedures, including nephrectomy and prostatectomy, were included in this prospective clinical trial. Institutional ethical approval was obtained, and patients were counseled preoperatively with informed consent. Both intraoperative and postoperative data were carefully recorded. Results: A total of seven patients were included in this initial study. This includes radical prostatectomy (n = 3), simple prostatectomy (n = 1), radical nephrectomy (n = 1), and simple nephrectomy (n = 2). The total operative time, port placement time, time to dock the ports, blood loss and length of hospital stay, and 30-day morbidity and mortality were recorded. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications up to 1 month follow-up. Conclusion: From the early experience with the Hugo RAS™ platform, it appears to be a safe robotic platform for major urologic procedures and is a good addition to the existing arsenal of surgical robots.