The atlas of supine single port extraperitoneal access

ABSTRACT Introduction: The introduction of Single-Port (SP) platform opened the field to new surgical options, allowing to perform major urological robot-assisted procedures extraperitoneally and with a supine patient positioning (1-3). Nevertheless, a comprehensive description of different supine access options is still lacking (4-6). In this light, we provided a step-by-step guide of SP extraperitoneal supine access options also exploring preliminary surgical outcomes. Materials and methods: Transvesical access was performed by a transversal incision 3cm above the pubic bone, after the anterior abdominal sheet incision, the bladder was insufflated with a flexible cystoscope and the detrusor muscle was incised at the level of the bladder dome. Similarly, the extraperitoneal access was carried out with a 4cm incision above the pubic bone, once visualized the preperitoneal space the prevesical fat was gently spread. The Low Anterior Access was performed with a 3cm incision at the McBurney point, the abdominal muscles were then spread. A gentle dissection was used laterally to develop the retroperitoneal space. Results: Overall, sixteen different procedures were performed with supine extraperitoneal access on 623 consecutive patients. No intraoperative conversions occurred. The median access time was 16 (IQR 12-21), 11 (IQR 7-14) and 14 (IQR 10-18) minutes in case of transvesical, extraperitoneal and low anterior access, respectively. Notably, 81.5 % of patients were discharged on the same day with a postoperative opioid free rate of 73%. Conclusion: The Atlas provides a comprehensive step-by-step guide to successfully perform all major urological SP procedures extraperitoneally and with supine patient positioning.

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

ABSTRACT 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).

The atlas of supine single port extraperitoneal access.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of Single-Port (SP) platform opened the field to new surgical options, allowing to perform major urological robot-assisted procedures extraperitoneally and with a supine patient positioning (1-3). Nevertheless, a comprehensive description of different supine access options is still lacking (4-6). In this light, we provided a step-by-step guide of SP extraperitoneal supine access options also exploring preliminary surgical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Transvesical access was performed by a transversal incision 3cm above the pubic bone, after the anterior abdominal sheet incision, the bladder was insufflated with a flexible cystoscope and the detrusor muscle was incised at the level of the bladder dome. Similarly, the extraperitoneal access was carried out with a 4cm incision above the pubic bone, once visualized the preperitoneal space the prevesical fat was gently spread. The Low Anterior Access was performed with a 3cm incision at the McBurney point, the abdominal muscles were then spread. A gentle dissection was used laterally to develop the retroperitoneal space. RESULTS: Overall, sixteen different procedures were performed with supine extraperitoneal access on 623 consecutive patients. No intraoperative conversions occurred. The median access time was 16 (IQR 12-21), 11 (IQR 7-14) and 14 (IQR 10-18) minutes in case of transvesical, extraperitoneal and low anterior access, respectively. Notably, 81.5 % of patients were discharged on the same day with a postoperative opioid free rate of 73%. CONCLUSION: The Atlas provides a comprehensive step-by-step guide to successfully perform all major urological SP procedures extraperitoneally and with supine patient positioning.

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).