Outcomes of Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion after Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide an update and compare perioperative outcomes and complications of intracorporeal and extracorporeal urinary diversion following robot-assisted radical cystectomy using data from the multi-institutional, prospectively maintained International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 2,125 patients from a total of 26 institutions. Intracorporeal urinary diversion was compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Multivariate logistic regression models using stepwise variable selection were fit to evaluate preoperative, operative and postoperative predictors of intracorporeal urinary diversion, operative time, high grade complications and 90-day hospital readmissions after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. RESULTS: In our cohort 1,094 patients (51%) underwent intracorporeal urinary diversion. These patients demonstrated shorter operative time (357 vs 400 minutes), less blood loss (300 vs 350 ml) and fewer blood transfusions (4% vs 19%, all p <0.001). They experienced more high grade complications (13% vs 10%, p = 0.02). Intracorporeal urinary diversion use increased from 9% of all urinary diversions in 2005 to 97% in 2015. Complications after this procedure decreased significantly with time (p <0.001). On multivariable analysis higher annual cystectomy volume (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03, p <0.002), year of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (2013-2016 OR 68, 95% CI 44-105, p <0.001) and American Society of Anesthesiologists® score less than 3 (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.38-2.22, p <0.001) were associated with undergoing intracorporeal urinary diversion. The procedure was associated with a shorter operative time of 27 minutes (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of intracorporeal urinary diversion has increased in the last decade. A higher annual institutional volume of robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with intracorporeal urinary diversion as well as with shorter operative time. Although intracorporeal urinary diversion was associated with higher grade complications than extracorporeal urinary diversion, they decreased with time.

Comparing robotic, laparoscopic and open cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes between Open Radical Cystectomy (ORC), Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy (LRC) and Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy (RARC). RARC is to be compared to LRC and ORC and LRC compared to ORC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, collating studies comparing RARC, LRC and ORC. Surgical and oncological outcome data were extracted and a meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were selected with total of 2,104 cases analyzed. RARC had a longer operative time (OPT) compared to LRC with no statistical difference between length of stay (LOS) and estimated blood loss (EBL). RARC had a significantly shorter LOS, reduced EBL, lower complication rate and longer OPT compared to ORC. There were no significant differences regarding lymph node yield (LNY) and positive surgical margins (PSM.) LRC had a reduced EBL, shorter LOS and increased OPT compared to ORC. There was no significant difference regarding LNY. CONCLUSION: RARC is comparable to LRC with better surgical results than ORC. LRC has better surgical outcomes than ORC. With the unique technological features of the robotic surgical system and increasing trend of intra-corporeal reconstruction it is likely that RARC will become the surgical option of choice.

Development and implementation of centralized simulation training: evaluation of feasibility, acceptability and construct validity.

UNLABELLED: WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: A competent urologist should not only have effective technical skills, but also other attributes that would make him/her a complete surgeon. These include team-working, communication and decision-making skills. Although evidence for effectiveness of simulation exists for individual simulators, there is a paucity of evidence for utility and effectiveness of these simulators in training programmes that aims to combine technical and non-technical skills training. This article explains the process of development and validation of a centrally coordinated simulation program (Participants - South-East Region Specialist Registrars) under the umbrella of the British Association for Urological Surgeons (BAUS) and the London Deanery. This program incorporated training of both technical (synthetic, animal and virtual reality models) and non-technical skills (simulated operating theatres). OBJECTIVES: To establish the feasibility and acceptability of a centralized, simulation-based training-programme. Simulation is increasingly establishing its role in urological training, with two areas that are relevant to urologists: (i) technical skills and (ii) non-technical skills. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this London Deanery supported pilot Simulation and Technology enhanced Learning Initiative (STeLI) project, we developed a structured multimodal simulation training programme. The programme incorporated: (i) technical skills training using virtual-reality simulators (Uro-mentor and Perc-mentor [Symbionix, Cleveland, OH, USA], Procedicus MIST-Nephrectomy [Mentice, Gothenburg, Sweden] and SEP Robotic simulator [Sim Surgery, Oslo, Norway]); bench-top models (synthetic models for cystocopy, transurethral resection of the prostate, transurethral resection of bladder tumour, ureteroscopy); and a European (Aalborg, Denmark) wet-lab training facility; as well as (ii) non-technical skills/crisis resource management (CRM), using SimMan (Laerdal Medical Ltd, Orpington, UK) to teach team-working, decision-making and communication skills. The feasibility, acceptability and construct validity of these training modules were assessed using validated questionnaires, as well as global and procedure/task-specific rating scales. RESULTS: In total 33, three specialist registrars of different grades and five urological nurses participated in the present study. Construct-validity between junior and senior trainees was significant. Of the participants, 90% rated the training models as being realistic and easy to use. In total 95% of the participants recommended the use of simulation during surgical training, 95% approved the format of the teaching by the faculty and 90% rated the sessions as well organized. A significant number of trainees (60%) would like to have easy access to a simulation facility to allow more practice and enhancement of their skills. CONCLUSIONS: A centralized simulation programme that provides training in both technical and non-technical skills is feasible. It is expected to improve the performance of future surgeons in a simulated environment and thus improve patient safety.