Single-Port Transvesical Vesico-Vaginal Fistula Repair: An Initial Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) is the most common urogenital fistula due to iatrogenic cause, primarily associated with gynecologic surgery (1). Although both conservative and surgical management may be considered, the optimal treatment is still uncertain and several studies were published using different techniques (open, laparoscopic or robotic) and approaches (extravesical, transvesical or transvaginal) (2-5). In this context, we aim to report our initial experience repairing VVF with Single-Port (SP) Transvesical (TV) access. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four patients with a diagnosis of VVF underwent SP-TV VVF repair between May 2022 and December 2023. Diagnosis was confirmed by cystoscopy, cystogram and in two cases by CT Urogram. Under general anesthesia, before robotic time, patients were placed in lithotomy position and a preliminary cystoscopy was performed. Fistula was noted and a 5fr stent was placed through the fistulous tract. Two ureteral stents were placed. Then, with patient supine, a transverse suprapubic 3cm incision and 2cm cystotomy were made for SP access. First step was to mark and remove fistula tract to the vagina. The edges of the vagina and bladder were dissected in order to have a closure free of tension and to create three different layers to close: vagina, muscularis layer of the bladder and mucosal layer of the bladder. A bladder catheter was placed, and the two ureteral stents were removed at the end of procedure. RESULTS: Mean age was 53 years old and three out of 4 patients developed VVF after gynecologic surgery. Two patients underwent VVF repair 6 and 8 months after total hysterectomy. One patient developed VVF after total hysterectomy and oophorectomy followed by radiation therapy. Last patient developed VVF after previous urological procedure. Fistula diameter was between 11 and 15mm. Operative time was 211 min, including preliminary cystoscopy, stents placement and SP-access. All patients were discharged on the same day with a bladder catheter, successfully removed between post-operative day 14-18 after negative cystogram. Only in one case a ureteral stent was left because the fistula was closed to the ureteral orifice and we reported one case of UTI twelve days after surgery, treated with outpatient antibiotics. Mean follow-up was 8 months, patients were scheduled for regular follow-up visits and no recurrence was reported. All patients have at least 3 months of post-operative follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that SP Transvesical VVF repair may be considered as a safe and feasible minimally invasive treatment for small/medium fistulae (10-15mm).

Single Port Radical Prostatectomy as a Viable Option for Highly Complex Patients: A Single Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the safety and feasibility of the Da Vinci single-port (SP) platform in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP), aiming to provide a viable option for patients with surgical and medical complexities that might otherwise limit their access to common minimally invasive technique. METHODS: Data from 60 medically and surgically highly complex patients undergoing SP-RARP between December 2018 and December 2023 were analyzed. Variables included patient characteristics, surgical history, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 17.0. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of cases had a hostile abdomen (HA) (≥1 major abdominal surgery), and 47% were medically highly complex (American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥5, and a body mass index ≥30). The extraperitoneal approach was used in 56% of HA cases and 68% of MHC cases. Intraoperative complications occurred in 12%, exclusively with the transperitoneal approach in HA cases. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) were 6% and 14%, respectively, with no significant difference between approaches. Same-day discharge was possible in 44% of HA cases and 54% of MHC cases, with significant statistical differences favoring the extraperitoneal approach in both groups. CONCLUSION: SP-RARP, particularly the extraperitoneal approach, is a viable option for highly complex and challenging cases, providing acceptable oncological and functional outcomes. Prospective studies are crucial for further validating the safety and feasibility of SP-RARP in this patient population.

Comparison of lateral flank approach and low anterior access for single port (SP) retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: an analysis from the single port advanced research consortium (SPARC).

Single Port (SP) robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) can be performed via retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approach. We aim to compare outcomes of two commonly described incisions for retroperitoneal SP RPN: lateral flank approach (LFA) and low anterior access (LAA). We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN from 2018 to 2023 as part of a large multi-institute collaboration (SPARC). Baseline demographic, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were compared using χ2, t test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust and logistic regressions. A total of 70 patients underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN, with 44 undergoing LAA. Overall, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The LAA group exhibited significantly lower median RENAL scores (8 vs. 5, p < 0.001) and more varied tumor locations (p = 0.002). In the bivariate analysis, there were no statistically significant differences in ischemia time, estimated blood loss, or complication rates between the groups. However, the LAA group had longer operative times (101 vs. 134 min, p < 0.001), but was more likely to undergo a same-day discharge (p < 0.001). When controlling for other variables, LAA was associated with shorter ischemia time (p = 0.005), but there was no significant difference in operative time (p = 0.348) and length of stay (p = 0.122). Both LFA and LAA are acceptable approaches for SP retroperitoneal RPN with comparable perioperative outcomes. This early data suggests the LAA is more versatile for varying tumor locations; however, larger cohort studies are needed to ascertain whether there is an overall difference in patient recovery.