Single Port Robotic Nephrectomy via lower anterior retroperitoneal approach: feasible, safe and effective option in surgically complex patients

ABSTRACT Purpose: Minimally invasive radical nephrectomy is often preferred for larger renal tumours not suitable for partial nephrectomy (1). When performed with a multiport robot, the procedure is routinely performed with a transperitoneal approach, with recent studies highlighting important factors for surgical outcomes, including predictive factors (2), segmental artery unclamping techniques (3), and comparisons of robotic techniques (4). This video shows that SP Robot-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy (RARN) via a lower anterior approach is valuable in challenging cases. Materials and Methods: We performed SP-RARN on two complex patients using a retroperitoneal lower anterior approach. The first patient, a 54-year-old female with a BMI of 36.8 kg/m2, had a ventral hernia and bowel obstruction history, with a 9 cm right middle kidney mass. The second patient, a 58-year-old male with a BMI of 31.19 kg/m2, had ESRD and was on peritoneal dialysis for 8 years, with a 3.4x3.7 cm mass in the right superior pole, suspected to be RCC. The surgical technique is detailed in the video. Results: Both procedures were successful, with operative times of 173 and 203 minutes and blood loss of 150 mL. No complications occurred. Patients were discharged after 31 and 38 hours, respectively. Histopathology confirmed RCC. At the 3-month follow-up, no complications or readmissions were reported. Second patient continued peritoneal dialysis without issues. Conclusion: Retroperitoneal SP-RARN via the lower anterior approach avoids the peritoneal cavity, making it suitable for certain patients. In these patients, more so than in others, this procedure is feasible, safe, and less morbid than the standard multiport approach.

Single Port Robotic Nephrectomy via lower anterior retroperitoneal approach: feasible, safe and effective option in surgically complex patients.

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive radical nephrectomy is often preferred for larger renal tumours not suitable for partial nephrectomy (1). When performed with a multiport robot, the procedure is routinely performed with a transperitoneal approach, with recent studies highlighting important factors for surgical outcomes, including predictive factors (2), segmental artery unclamping techniques (3), and comparisons of robotic techniques (4). This video shows that SP Robot-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy (RARN) via a lower anterior approach is valuable in challenging cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed SP-RARN on two complex patients using a retroperitoneal lower anterior approach. The first patient, a 54-year-old female with a BMI of 36.8 kg/m², had a ventral hernia and bowel obstruction history, with a 9 cm right middle kidney mass. The second patient, a 58-year-old male with a BMI of 31.19 kg/m², had ESRD and was on peritoneal dialysis for 8 years, with a 3.4x3.7 cm mass in the right superior pole, suspected to be RCC. The surgical technique is detailed in the video. RESULTS: Both procedures were successful, with operative times of 173 and 203 minutes and blood loss of 150 mL. No complications occurred. Patients were discharged after 31 and 38 hours, respectively. Histopathology confirmed RCC. At the 3-month follow-up, no complications or readmissions were reported. Second patient continued peritoneal dialysis without issues. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneal SP-RARN via the lower anterior approach avoids the peritoneal cavity, making it suitable for certain patients. In these patients, more so than in others, this procedure is feasible, safe, and less morbid than the standard multiport approach.

Robotic salvage partial nephrectomy following surgical and ablative therapies

ABSTRACT Purpose: Partial nephrectomies in the salvage setting after ablative or surgical therapy remain challenging cases that are underreported in the literature (1-5). The aim of this video is to demonstrate techniques for robotic salvage partial nephrectomy to manage recurrent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after failed prior partial nephrectomy and primary cryotherapy. Materials and methods: A 55-year-old man after previous robotic-assisted right partial nephrectomy presented with a 2.5 cm locally recurrent renal mass abutting the collecting system. A 59-year-old man with right renal cell carcinoma initially treated with cryoablation presented local recurrence. CT imaging demonstrated 2.6 cm right renal mass consistent with tumor recurrence at previous treatment site. Results: Both procedures were completed in under 180 minutes. Clamp time was 22 minutes after the previous partial nephrectomy and 25 minutes after previous cryotherapy. There were no perioperative complications. Pathology in both cases demonstrated pT1a clear cell RCC with negative margins. Both patients have since no evidence of recurrent disease on follow-up imaging at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Conclusions: Salvage robotic partial nephrectomy should be considered as a feasible treatment option after failure of initial therapy—surgical or ablative. A salvage procedure is often more challenging than its standard therapy-naïve counterpart due to development of dense inflammation after previous interventions. Despite this, robotic partial nephrectomies in the salvage setting can be safely carried out with good surgical outcomes, particularly when utilizing intraoperative ultrasound to identify tumor margins and key anatomy.

Robotic salvage partial nephrectomy following surgical and ablative therapies.

PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomies in the salvage setting after ablative or surgical therapy remain challenging cases that are underreported in the literature (1-5). The aim of this video is to demonstrate techniques for robotic salvage partial nephrectomy to manage recurrent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after failed prior partial nephrectomy and primary cryotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 55-year-old man after previous robotic-assisted right partial nephrectomy presented with a 2.5 cm locally recurrent renal mass abutting the collecting system. A 59-year-old man with right renal cell carcinoma initially treated with cryoablation presented local recurrence. CT imaging demonstrated 2.6 cm right renal mass consistent with tumor recurrence at previous treatment site. RESULTS: Both procedures were completed in under 180 minutes. Clamp time was 22 minutes after the previous partial nephrectomy and 25 minutes after previous cryotherapy. There were no perioperative complications. Pathology in both cases demonstrated pT1a clear cell RCC with negative margins. Both patients have since no evidence of recurrent disease on follow-up imaging at 1 and 2 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage robotic partial nephrectomy should be considered as a feasible treatment option after failure of initial therapy-surgical or ablative. A salvage procedure is often more challenging than its standard therapy-naïve counterpart due to development of dense inflammation after previous interventions. Despite this, robotic partial nephrectomies in the salvage setting can be safely carried out with good surgical outcomes, particularly when utilizing intraoperative ultrasound to identify tumor margins and key anatomy.

Single Port Robotic Pyeloplasty: early single-center experience

ABSTRACT Purpose: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a prevalent cause of hydronephrosis, especially in young patients. The treatment paradigm for this condition has shifted from open to minimally invasive pyeloplasty. In the present study we describe our initial single centre experience with single port (SP) robot-assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) via periumbilical incision. Material and methods: With the patient in a 60-degree left flank position, the SP system is docked with the Access port (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, US) placed in a periumbilical 3 cm incision. Robotic instruments are deployed as follows: camera at 12 o'clock, bipolar grasper at 9 o'clock, scissors at 3 o'clock and Cadiere at 6 o'clock. After isolation and identification of the ureter and the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ), the ureter is transected at this level and then spatulated. Anastomosis is carried out by two hemicontinuous running sutures, over a JJ stent. Results: Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 8 SP RAP have been performed at our institution, with a median (interquartile range, IQR) of 23 years (20.5-36.5). Intraoperative outcomes showed a median (IQR) OT of 210.5 minutes (190-240.5) and a median (IQR) estimated blood loss (EBL) of 50 mL (22.5-50). No postoperative complications were encountered, with a median (IQR) length of stay (LOS) of 31 hours (28.5-34). Conclusion: In the present study we evaluated the feasibility and safety of SP RAP. The observed outcomes and potential benefits, combined with the adaptability of the SP platform, hold promising implications for the application of SP system in pyeloplasty treatment.

Single Port Robotic Pyeloplasty: early single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a prevalent cause of hydronephrosis, especially in young patients. The treatment paradigm for this condition has shifted from open to minimally invasive pyeloplasty. In the present study we describe our initial single centre experience with single port (SP) robot-assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) via periumbilical incision. MATERIAL AND METHODS: With the patient in a 60-degree left flank position, the SP system is docked with the Access port (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, US) placed in a periumbilical 3 cm incision. Robotic instruments are deployed as follows: camera at 12 o'clock, bipolar grasper at 9 o'clock, scissors at 3 o'clock and Cadiere at 6 o'clock. After isolation and identification of the ureter and the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ), the ureter is transected at this level and then spatulated. Anastomosis is carried out by two hemicontinuous running sutures, over a JJ stent. RESULTS: Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 8 SP RAP have been performed at our institution, with a median (interquartile range, IQR) of 23 years (20.5-36.5). Intraoperative outcomes showed a median (IQR) OT of 210.5 minutes (190-240.5) and a median (IQR) estimated blood loss (EBL) of 50 mL (22.5-50). No postoperative complications were encountered, with a median (IQR) length of stay (LOS) of 31 hours (28.5-34). CONCLUSION: In the present study we evaluated the feasibility and safety of SP RAP. The observed outcomes and potential benefits, combined with the adaptability of the SP platform, hold promising implications for the application of SP system in pyeloplasty treatment.

Robotic partial nephrectomy for large renal Leiomyoma: first case report

ABSTRACT Aim: Renal leiomyoma is a rare benign mesenchymal tumor arising from the smooth muscle cells of the kidney. Renal capsule is its most common location (1). Large tumor may require surgical excision which can be challenging in case of proximity to major vessels (2). Indications of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) have exponentially expanded over the past few years (3). We aim to report a case of large renal leiomyoma successfully managed with RPN. Methods: A 59-year-old female patient with BMI 51 presented with chief complaint of abdominal discomfort. The patient underwent a CT scan that revealed a massive circumscribed exophytic complex solid cystic mass of 4.5 × 7.7 × 6.2 cm, arising from the lower pole of right kidney and abutting the inferior vena cava. RENAL score was 11ah (high complexity). Past surgical history included mid-urethral sling, breast reduction, and hysterectomy with salpingectomy. Preoperative creatinine and eGFR were 0.9 (mg/dL) and 77 (mL/min), respectively. A robotic excision of this mass was successfully performed by using Da Vinci Xi platform. Main steps of the procedure are illustrated in the present video. Results: Dissection and isolation of the tumor were carefully performed after identifying key anatomical structures such as the ureter, the IVC and the renal hilum. Intraoperative ultrasound was used to confirm the margins of the mass. The renal artery was clamped and then the tumor was resected/enucleated. Renal parenchyma was re-approximated with a single layer of interrupted CT-1 Vicryl 0 with sliding clip technique. Warm ischemia time was 19 min. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was 250 ml. Operative time was 165 min. No intraoperative complications occurred. No drain was placed. Patient was discharged on postoperative day 2. Post-operative hypotension was managed with fluid bolus. Postoperative creatinine and eGFR were 1,0 (mg/dL) and 69 (mL/min/1.72m2), respectively. Pathology revealed a leiomyoma of genital stromal origin with hyalinization and calcification. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first description of RPN for the management of a large (about 8 cm) renal leiomyoma. Robotic assisted surgery allows to expand the indications of minimally invasive conservative renal surgery whose feasibility becomes even more clinically significant in case of benign masses which can be managed without sacrificing healthy renal parenchyma.

Robotic partial nephrectomy for large renal Leiomyoma: first case report.

AIM: Renal leiomyoma is a rare benign mesenchymal tumor arising from the smooth muscle cells of the kidney. Renal capsule is its most common location (1). Large tumor may require surgical excision which can be challenging in case of proximity to major vessels (2). Indications of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) have exponentially expanded over the past few years (3). We aim to report a case of large renal leiomyoma successfully managed with RPN. METHODS: A 59-year-old female patient with BMI 51 presented with chief complaint of abdominal discomfort. The patient underwent a CT scan that revealed a massive circumscribed exophytic complex solid cystic mass of 4.5 x 7.7 x 6.2 cm, arising from the lower pole of right kidney and abutting the inferior vena cava. RENAL score was 11ah (high complexity). Past surgical history included mid-urethral sling, breast reduction, and hysterectomy with salpingectomy. Preoperative creatinine and eGFR were 0.9 (mg/dL) and 77 (mL/min), respectively. A robotic excision of this mass was successfully performed by using Da Vinci Xi platform. Main steps of the procedure are illustrated in the present video. RESULTS: Dissection and isolation of the tumor were carefully performed after identifying key anatomical structures such as the ureter, the IVC and the renal hilum. Intraoperative ultrasound was used to confirm the margins of the mass. The renal artery was clamped and then the tumor was resected/enucleated. Renal parenchyma was re-approximated with a single layer of interrupted CT-1 Vicryl 0 with sliding clip technique. Warm ischemia time was 19 min. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was 250 ml. Operative time was 165 min. No intraoperative complications occurred. No drain was placed. Patient was discharged on postoperative day 2. Post-operative hypotension was managed with fluid bolus. Postoperative creatinine and eGFR were 1,0 (mg/dL) and 69 (mL/min/1.72m2), respectively. Pathology revealed a leiomyoma of genital stromal origin with hyalinization and calcification. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first description of RPN for the management of a large (about 8 cm) renal leiomyoma. Robotic assisted surgery allows to expand the indications of minimally invasive conservative renal surgery whose feasibility becomes even more clinically significant in case of benign masses which can be managed without sacrificing healthy renal parenchyma.

Laparoscopic Versus Percutaneous Cryoablation of Small Renal Mass: Systematic Review and Cumulative Analysis of Comparative Studies.

The objective of this study was to compare the surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of laparoscopic and percutaneous cryoablation for the treatment of small renal masses. A systematic review of the literature was performed through March 2016 using PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid databases. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy on the basis of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Only studies that compared laparoscopic and percutaneous kidney cryoablation were included in the meta-analysis. Eleven retrospective comparative studies were identified and selected for the analysis, including 1725 cases: 804 (46.6%) percutaneous and 921 (53.4%) laparoscopic cryoablations. Percutaneous cryoablation was performed more frequently for posterior tumors (P < .001), whereas laparoscopy was more common for endophytic lesions (P = .01). The length of follow-up was longer for laparoscopy (P < .001). Percutaneous cryoablation was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay (P < .001). A lower likelihood of residual disease was recorded for laparoscopic (P = .003), whereas tumor recurrence rate favored percutaneous cryoablation (P = .02). The 2 procedures were similar for recurrence-free survival (P = .08), and overall survival (P = .51). No significant difference was found in postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = .78). Laparoscopic and percutaneous kidney cryoablation offer similar favorable oncological outcomes with minimal effect on renal function. The percutaneous access can offer shorter hospital stay and faster recovery, which can be appealing in an era of cost restraint.

Laparoendoscopic single site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for transperitoneal pyeloplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to review studies comparing the outcomes of the laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) pyeloplasty with those of conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP). A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis) criteria. The methodological quality of the studies was rated according validated scales. The level of evidence (LE) was reported as described by the Oxford criteria. Preoperative demographic parameters and perioperative outcomes between the two surgical techniques were assessed. A meta-analysis of the included studies was performed. A total of 5 studies were elected for the analysis, including 164 cases, 70 (42.6%) of them being LESS and 94 (57.4%) being CLP. Four studies were observational retrospective comparative studies (LE: 3a-4); one was a prospective randomized controlled trial (LE: 2b). There was no significant difference in age, body mass index, gender, side and presence of the crossing vessel, between the groups. There was no significant difference regarding the operative time (weight mean difference [WMD]: -7.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -71.82-57.79; P = 0.83) and length of hospital stay (WMD: 0.04; 95% CI: -0.11-0.20; P = 0.58), whereas the estimated blood loss was statistically lower for LESS (WMD: -16.83; 95% CI: -31.79--1.87; P = 0.03). The postoperative use of analgesic favored the LESS group but without reaching statistical significance (WMD: -7.52; 95% CI: -17.56-2.53; P = 0.14). In conclusion, LESS pyeloplasty offers comparable surgical and functional outcomes to CLP while providing the potential advantages of less blood loss and lower analgesic requirement. Thus, despite being more technically challenging, LESS pyeloplasty can be regarded as a minimally invasive approach for patients seeking fewer incisional scars.

Urine leak in minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: analysis of risk factors and role of intraoperative ureteral catheterization

Purpose To investigate risk factors for urine leak in patients undergoing minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) and to determine the role of intraoperative ureteral catheterization in preventing this postoperative complication. Materials and Methods MIPN procedures done from September 1999 to July 2012 at our Center were reviewed from our IRB-approved database. Patient and tumor characteristics, operative techniques and outcomes were analyzed. Patients with evidence of urine leak were identified. Outcomes were compared between patients with preoperative ureteral catheterization (C-group) and those without (NC-group). Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors predicting postoperative urine leak. Results A total of 1,019 cases were included (452 robotic partial nephrectomy cases and 567 laparoscopic partial nephrectomy cases). Five hundred twenty eight patients (51.8%) were in the C-group, whereas 491 of them (48.2%) in the NC-group. Urine leak occurred in 31(3%) cases, 4.6% in the C-group and 1.4% in the NC-group (p<0.001). Tumors in NC-group had significantly higher RENAL score, shorter operative and warm ischemic times. On multivariable analysis, tumor proximity to collecting system (OR=9.2; p<0.01), surgeon’s early operative experience (OR=7.8; p<0.01) and preoperative moderate to severe CKD (OR=3.1; p<0.01) significantly increased the odds of the occurrence of a postoperative urine leak. Conclusion Clinically significant urine leak after MIPN in a high volume institution setting is uncommon. This event is more likely to occur in cases of renal masses that are close to the collecting system, in patients with preoperative CKD and when operating surgeon is still in the learning curve for the procedure. Our findings suggest that routine intraoperative ureteral catheterization during MIPN does not reduce the probability of postoperative urine leak. In addition, it adds to the overall ...

Step-by-Step robotic heminephrectomy for duplicated renal collecting system.

INTRODUCTION: A duplicated renal collecting system is a relatively common congenital anomaly rarely presenting in adults. AIM: In this video we demonstrate our step-by-step technique of Robotic heminephrectomy in a patient with non-functioning upper pole moiety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following cystoscopy and ureteral catheter insertion the patient was placed in 60° modified flank position with the ipsilateral arm positioned at the side of the patient. A straight-line, three arm robotic port configuration was employed. The robot was docked at a 90-degree angle, perpendicular to the patient. Following mobilization the colon and identifying both ureters of the duplicated system, the ureters were followed cephalically toward, hilar vessels where the hilar anatomy was identified. The nonfunctioning pole vasculature was ligated using hem-o-lok clips. The ureter was sharply divided and the proximal ureteral stump was passed posterior the renal hilum. Ureteral stump was used as for retraction and heminephrectomy is completed along the line demarcating the upper and lower pole moieties. Renorrhaphy was performed using 0-Vicryl suture with a CT-1 needle. The nonfunctioning pole ureter was then dissected caudally toward the bladder hiatus, ligated using clips, and transected. RESULTS: The operating time was 240 minutes and blood loss was 100 cc. There was no complication post-operatively. CONCLUSIONS: Wrist articulation and degree of freedom offered by robotic platform facilitates successful performance of minimally invasive heminephrectomy in the setting of an atrophic and symptomatic renal segment.

Step-by-Step robotic heminephrectomy for duplicated renal collecting system

Introduction A duplicated renal collecting system is a relatively common congenital anomaly rarely presenting in adults. Aim In this video we demonstrate our step-by-step technique of Robotic heminephrectomy in a patient with non-functioning upper pole moiety. Materials and Methods Following cystoscopy and ureteral catheter insertion the patient was placed in 600 modified flank position with the ipsilateral arm positioned at the side of the patient. A straight-line, three arm robotic port configuration was employed. The robot was docked at a 90-degree angle, perpendicular to the patient. Following mobilization the colon and identifying both ureters of the duplicated system, the ureters were followed cephalically toward, hilar vessels where the hilar anatomy was identified. The nonfunctioning pole vasculature was ligated using hem-o-lok clips. The ureter was sharply divided and the proximal ureteral stump was passed posterior the renal hilum. Ureteral stump was used as for retraction and heminephrectomy is completed along the line demarcating the upper and lower pole moieties. Renorrhaphy was performed using 0-Vicryl suture with a CT-1 needle. The nonfunctioning pole ureter was then dissected caudally toward the bladder hiatus, ligated using clips, and transected. Results The operating time was 240 minutes and blood loss was 100 cc. There was no complication post-operatively. Conclusions Wrist articulation and degree of freedom offered by robotic platform facilitates successful performance of minimally invasive heminephrectomy in the setting of an atrophic and symptomatic renal segment. .

Urine leak in minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: analysis of risk factors and role of intraoperative ureteral catheterization.

PURPOSE: To investigate risk factors for urine leak in patients undergoing minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) and to determine the role of intraoperative ureteral catheterization in preventing this postoperative complication. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MIPN procedures done from September 1999 to July 2012 at our Center were reviewed from our IRB-approved database. Patient and tumor characteristics, operative techniques and outcomes were analyzed. Patients with evidence of urine leak were identified. Outcomes were compared between patients with preoperative ureteral catheterization (C-group) and those without (NC-group). Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors predicting postoperative urine leak. RESULTS: A total of 1,019 cases were included (452 robotic partial nephrectomy cases and 567 laparoscopic partial nephrectomy cases). Five hundred twenty eight patients (51.8%) were in the C-group, whereas 491 of them (48.2%) in the NC-group. Urine leak occurred in 31(3%) cases, 4.6% in the C-group and 1.4% in the NC-group (p<0.001). Tumors in NC-group had significantly higher RENAL score, shorter operative and warm ischemic times. On multivariable analysis, tumor proximity to collecting system (OR=9.2; p<0.01), surgeon's early operative experience (OR=7.8; p<0.01) and preoperative moderate to severe CKD (OR=3.1; p<0.01) significantly increased the odds of the occurrence of a postoperative urine leak. CONCLUSION: Clinically significant urine leak after MIPN in a high volume institution setting is uncommon. This event is more likely to occur in cases of renal masses that are close to the collecting system, in patients with preoperative CKD and when operating surgeon is still in the learning curve for the procedure. Our findings suggest that routine intraoperative ureteral catheterization during MIPN does not reduce the probability of postoperative urine leak. In addition, it adds to the overall operative time.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1076 cases.

BACKGROUND: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has gained popularity in urology over the last few years. OBJECTIVE: To report a large multi-institutional worldwide series of LESS in urology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive cases of LESS done between August 2007 and November 2010 at 18 participating institutions were included in this retrospective analysis. INTERVENTION: Each group performed a variety of LESS procedures according to its own protocols, entry criteria, and techniques. MEASUREMENTS: Demographic data, main perioperative outcome parameters, and information related to the surgical technique were gathered and analyzed. Conversions to reduced-port laparoscopy, conventional laparoscopy, or open surgery were evaluated, as were intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 1076 patients were included in the analysis. The most common procedures were extirpative or ablative operations in the upper urinary tract. The da Vinci robot was used to operate on 143 patients (13%). A single-port technique was most commonly used and the umbilicus represented the most common access site. Overall, operative time was 160±93 min and estimated blood loss was 148±234 ml. Skin incision length at closure was 3.5±1.5 cm. Mean hospital stay was 3.6±2.7 d with a visual analog pain score at discharge of 1.5±1.4. An additional port was used in 23% of cases. The overall conversion rate was 20.8%; 15.8% of patients were converted to reduced-port laparoscopy, 4% to conventional laparoscopy/robotic surgery, and 1% to open surgery. The intraoperative complication rate was 3.3%. Postoperative complications, mostly low grade, were encountered in 9.5% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a global view of the evolution of LESS in the field of minimally invasive urologic surgery. A broad range of procedures have been effectively performed, primarily in the academic setting, within diverse health care systems around the world. Since LESS is performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, the risk of complications remains low when stringent patient-selection criteria are applied.