Da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: a multicentric collaboration and step-by-step techniques

ABSTRACT Introduction Several techniques of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the da Vinci SP (SP) have been described since its clearance by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in 2018 ( 1 , 2 ). Even with the expanding literature about this robot, the SP technology has been restricted to a few centers in the US and Asia due to the recent release of this robot in the marked.3 In this scenario, we provided, in this video compilation, a consensus of SP referral centers describing the current approaches and techniques of da Vinci SP Radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). Surgical Technique We have illustrated five different techniques, including transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, Retzius-sparing, transvesical, and transperineal ( 4 - 6 ). Each surgery demonstrated crucial steps from the trocar placement until anastomosis. All approaches follow anatomic concepts and landmarks to minimize positive surgical margins, optimize oncological outcomes and promote optimal functional recovery. The trocar placement and the use of an assistant port were selected according to the operative technique of each institution. None of these surgeries had intra- or postoperative complications, and the pain management until discharge was controlled without using narcotics. All patients were discharged in less than 16 hours of surgery. Conclusion Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy performed with the da Vinci SP is feasible and safe with optimal perioperative outcomes. Five different approaches were described in this video compilation, and we believe that the technical details provided by this multicentric collaboration are crucial for centers willing to initiate the SP approach to radical prostatectomy.

Contemporary techniques of da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: multicentric collaboration and expert opinion

ABSTRACT Background The da Vinci SP robot consists of an innovative single port trocar that houses a flexible camera and three biarticulated arms, which minimizes the number of incisions to assess the surgical site, allowing a less invasive procedure. However, due to its recent release in the market, the current literature reporting SP-RARP is still restricted to a few centers. In this scenario, after performing a literature search with all available techniques of SP-RARP, our objective is to report a multicentric opinion of referral centers on different techniques to approach SP-RARP. Results The SP literature is provided by only a few centers due to the limited number of this new console in the market. Five different approaches are available: transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, Retzius-Sparing, transperineal and transvesical. None of the current studies describe long-term functional or oncological outcomes. However, all approaches had satisfactory operative performance with minimum complication rates. Conclusions Several techniques of SP-RARP have been reported in the literature. We performed a multicentric collaboration describing and illustrating the most challenging steps of this surgery. We believe that the details provided in this article are useful teaching material for new centers willing to adopt the SP technology.

Contemporary techniques of da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: multicentric collaboration and expert opinion.

BACKGROUND: The da Vinci SP robot consists of an innovative single port trocar that houses a flexible camera and three biarticulated arms, which minimizes the number of incisions to assess the surgical site, allowing a less invasive procedure. However, due to its recent release in the market, the current literature reporting SP-RARP is still restricted to a few centers. In this scenario, after performing a literature search with all available techniques of SP-RARP, our objective is to report a multicentric opinion of referral centers on different techniques to approach SP-RARP. RESULTS: The SP literature is provided by only a few centers due to the limited number of this new console in the market. Five different approaches are available: transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, Retzius-Sparing, transperineal and transvesical. None of the current studies describe long-term functional or oncological outcomes. However, all approaches had satisfactory operative performance with minimum complication rates. CONCLUSIONS: Several techniques of SP-RARP have been reported in the literature. We performed a multicentric collaboration describing and illustrating the most challenging steps of this surgery. We believe that the details provided in this article are useful teaching material for new centers willing to adopt the SP technology.

Da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: a multicentric collaboration and step-by-step techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Several techniques of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the da Vinci SP (SP) have been described since its clearance by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in 2018 (1, 2). Even with the expanding literature about this robot, the SP technology has been restricted to a few centers in the US and Asia due to the recent release of this robot in the marked.3 In this scenario, we provided, in this video compilation, a consensus of SP referral centers describing the current approaches and techniques of da Vinci SP Radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: We have illustrated five different techniques, including transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, Retzius-sparing, transvesical, and transperineal (4-6). Each surgery demonstrated crucial steps from the trocar placement until anastomosis. All approaches follow anatomic concepts and landmarks to minimize positive surgical margins, optimize oncological outcomes and promote optimal functional recovery. The trocar placement and the use of an assistant port were selected according to the operative technique of each institution. None of these surgeries had intra- or postoperative complications, and the pain management until discharge was controlled without using narcotics. All patients were discharged in less than 16 hours of surgery. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy performed with the da Vinci SP is feasible and safe with optimal perioperative outcomes. Five different approaches were described in this video compilation, and we believe that the technical details provided by this multicentric collaboration are crucial for centers willing to initiate the SP approach to radical prostatectomy.

Evaluating the ability of students to learn and utilize a novel telepresence platform, Proximie.

Novice users of telesurgery could be limited by their experience and technical ability. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care systems is unprecedented, and telehealth allowed care providers and patients a safety margin. An indirect impact of redeployment of hospital staff during COVID-19 management has been on the reduced educational opportunities for residents. Proximie can be considered as a virtual teaching platform or classroom for any user. Twenty-one students voluntarily participated in utilizing a da Vinci® skills simulator (dVSS) to carry out surgical training simulation tasks. Our study focuses on digital native's adaptation to utilizing Proximie's augmented reality platform to direct task performance, to gauge its feasibility by this unique cohort.

Implementing the da Vinci SP Without Increasing Positive Surgical Margins: Experience and Pathologic Outcomes of a Prostate Cancer Referral Center.

Background: Different consoles have been described for the da Vinci single-port (SP) surgery since it was cleared by the FDA in November 2018. However, the literature still lacks studies identifying factors related to the SP learning curve and how to overcome the technological limitations, especially in terms of maintaining acceptable positive surgical margins (PSMs). This study describes our perioperative experience implementing a safe SP approach to radical prostatectomy (RP) while minimizing PSM, especially during the initial learning period. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 100 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent RP with the SP robot from June 2019 to December 2020 (IRB 237998). We accessed the perioperative data, pathology report, and short-term oncologic outcomes. We also represented our PSM trends in 100 consecutive cases, discussing potential factors for minimizing the learning curve impact on positive margins and outcomes. Medians and interquartile ranges, as well as frequencies and proportions, were reported for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Results and Limitations: The median follow-up is 14 months (8-17). The cohort has a median age of 62 years (56-68), median prostate-specific antigen of 5.5 (4.3-7.7), median preoperative Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) of 20, median American Urological Association (AUA) of 7 (3-11), and median body mass index of 25.4 (23.4-27.4). The median total operative time was 114 minutes (104-124), the median console time was 80 minutes (75-90). No intraoperative complications were reported. The overall rate of PSMs was 15% (5% were pT2 and 10% were pT3). Conclusions: The SP approach to RP is feasible, safe, and with acceptable intraoperative performance. In this study, we have described crucial factors for considering selection criteria in candidates for SP-robot-assisted RP. We believe that with an appropriate patient selection, this robot can be safely implemented without increasing positive margins and compromising the outcomes, especially during the learning curve period.