Robot-assisted laparoscopic placement of extravascular stent for nutcracker syndrome.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lin JC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7371954 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:In select centers, laparoscopic (robot)-assisted pyeloplasty has emerged as a viable approach for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Stent placement for urinary diversion is a common postoperative practice with several potential techniques and respective challenges. Robot-assisted diversion techniques such as indwelling Double-J or nephroureteral stents require either additional anesthesia or costs or they carry bleeding risks. Herein we describe an alternative postpyeloplasty cutaneous pyeloureteral (CPU) stenting technique that minimizes these challenges and achieves effective urinary diversion.
| S-EPMC4382828 | biostudies-other
Project description:Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.
| S-EPMC4726673 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundIt is not clear whether the routine placement of a pelvic drain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a necessity. The aim of this study was to investigate this through a meta-analysis of RCTs and non-randomized studies.MethodsA search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science, up to 9 March 2023, for clinical trials comparing no drain with pelvic drain placement for patients with prostate cancer after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Two researchers independently conducted literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. A random-effect model was assumed for all analyses. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and, for non-randomized studies, the ROBINS-I tool was used (where ROBINS-I stands for Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions). This meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023406429).ResultsA total of six studies with 1480 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both the meta-analysis of RCTs and the meta-analysis of non-randomized studies showed that patients without drains had a similar estimated blood loss (mean difference 40.49 ml, 95% c.i. -59.75 to 140.74 ml, P = 0.430, and mean difference -14.20 ml, 95% c.i. -32.26 to 3.87 ml, P = 0.120 respectively), overall complication rate (OR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.35 to 1.04, P = 0.070, and OR 0.90, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 1.39, P = 0.640 respectively), Clavien-Dindo grade I-II complication rate (OR 0.62, 95% c.i. 0.34 to 1.13, P = 0.120, and OR 0.83, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 2.51, P = 0.750 respectively), Clavien-Dindo grade III-V complication rate (OR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.10 to 3.69, P = 0.590, and OR 0.92, 95% c.i. 0.25 to 3.39, P = 0.900 respectively), and duration of hospital stay (mean difference -0.08 days, 95% c.i. -0.45 to 0.29 days, P = 0.670, and mean difference -0.64 days, 95% c.i. -2.67 to 1.39 days, P = 0.540 respectively) compared with routinely drained patients. Meta-analysis of non-randomized studies revealed that the duration of operation for patients without drains was shorter than that for patients with drains (mean difference -34.88 min, 95% c.i. -43.58 to -26.18 min, P < 0.001), but the meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that there was no significant difference between the two groups (mean difference -7.64 min, 95% c.i. -15.61 to 0.32 min, P = 0.060).ConclusionThe intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients without drains were not inferior to those of patients with drains. In selected patients, pelvic drains can be omitted after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
| S-EPMC10754771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An infant born with hypospadias and no palpable gonads was diagnosed with persistent mullerian duct syndrome (PMDS) based on history, physical examination, laboratory testing, and radiologic imaging. A robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, right gonadal biopsy, and bilateral orchiopexies were performed without incident. Final pathology confirmed the diagnosis of PMDS. To our knowledge, this is only the second report of PMDS managed through a robot-assisted laparoscopic approach.
| S-EPMC3972322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo compare the postoperative continence and clinical outcomes of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RS-RALP) with non-RS RALP for patients with prostate cancer.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register from 1999 to 2019 for studies comparing RS-RALP to non-RS RALP for the treatment of prostate cancer. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data.ResultsA total of seven studies involving 1620 patients were included in our meta-analysis. No significant difference was found in positive surgical margins (PSM), bilateral nerve-sparing, postoperative hernia, complications, blood loss, or operative time. Postoperative continence was better with RS-RALP compared with non-RS RALP (OR = 1.02, OR: 2.86, 95% CI 1.94-4.20, p < 0.05).ConclusionsRS-RALP had a better recovery of postoperative continence than non-RS RALP. The perioperative outcomes were comparable for the two methods.
| S-EPMC7398331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer (GC). A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage GC. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage GC, especially in Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Some intrinsic drawbacks of the conventional laparoscopic technique have prevented the worldwide spread of laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer and, despite technological advances in recent year, it remains a technically challenging procedure. The introduction of robotic surgery over the last ten years has implied a notable mutation of certain minimally invasive procedures, making it possible to overcome some limitations of the traditional laparoscopic technique. Robot-assisted gastric resection with D2 lymph node dissection has been shown to be safe and feasible in prospective and retrospective studies. However, to date there are no high quality comparative studies investigating the advantages of a robotic approach to GC over traditional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. On the basis of the literature review here presented, robot-assisted surgery seems to fulfill oncologic criteria for D2 dissection and has a comparable oncologic outcome to traditional laparoscopic and open procedure. Robot-assisted gastrectomy was associated with the trend toward a shorter hospital stay with a comparable morbidity of conventional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy, but randomized clinical trials and longer follow-ups are needed to evaluate the possible influence of robot gastrectomy on GC patient survival.
| S-EPMC4932206 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRobot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) offers potential cure for localised prostate cancer but is associated with considerable toxicity. Potency and urinary continence are improved when the neurovascular bundles (NVBs) are spared during a nerve spare (NS) RALP. There is reluctance, however, to perform NS RALP when there are concerns that the cancer extends beyond the capsule of the prostate into the NVB, as NS RALP in this instance increases the risk of a positive surgical margin (PSM). The NeuroSAFE technique involves intraoperative fresh-frozen section analysis of the posterolateral aspect of the prostate margin to assess whether cancer extends beyond the capsule. There is evidence from large observational studies that functional outcomes can be improved and PSM rates reduced when the NeuroSAFE technique is used during RALP. To date, however, there has been no randomised controlled trial (RCT) to substantiate this finding. The NeuroSAFE PROOF feasibility study is designed to assess whether it is feasible to randomise men to NeuroSAFE RALP versus a control arm of 'standard of practice' RALP.MethodsNeuroSAFE PROOF feasibility study will be a multicentre, single-blinded RCT with patients randomised 1:1 to either NeuroSAFE RALP (intervention) or standard RALP (control). Treatment allocation will occur after trial entry and consent. The primary outcome will be assessed as the successful accrual of 50 men at three sites over 15 months. Secondary outcomes will be used to aid subsequent power calculations for the definitive full-scale RCT and will include rates of NS; PSM; biochemical recurrence; adjuvant treatments; and patient-reported functional outcomes on potency, continence and quality of life.Ethics and disseminationNeuroSAFE PROOF has ethical approval (Regional Ethics Committee reference 17/LO/1978). NeuroSAFE PROOF is supported by National Institute for Healthcare Research Research for Patient Benefit funding (NIHR reference PB-PG-1216-20013). Findings will be made available through peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberNCT03317990.
| S-EPMC6575674 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCompared to conventional laparoscopy, robot assisted surgery is expected to have most potential in difficult areas and demanding technical skills like minimally invasive suturing. This study was performed to identify the differences in the learning curves of laparoscopic versus robot assisted suturing.MethodNovice participants performed three suturing tasks on the EoSim laparoscopic augmented reality simulator or the RobotiX robot assisted virtual reality simulator. Each participant performed an intracorporeal suturing task, a tilted plane needle transfer task and an anastomosis needle transfer task. To complete the learning curve, all tasks were repeated up to twenty repetitions or until a time plateau was reached. Clinically relevant and comparable parameters regarding time, movements and safety were recorded. Intracorporeal suturing time and cumulative sum analysis was used to compare the learning curves and phases.ResultsSeventeen participants completed the learning curve laparoscopically and 30 robot assisted. Median first knot suturing time was 611 s (s) for laparoscopic versus 251 s for robot assisted (p < 0.001), and this was 324 s versus 165 (sixth knot, p < 0.001) and 257 s and 149 s (eleventh knot, p < 0.001) respectively on base of the found learning phases. The percentage of 'adequate surgical knots' was higher in the laparoscopic than in the robot assisted group. First knot: 71% versus 60%, sixth knot: 100% versus 83%, and eleventh knot: 100% versus 73%. When assessing the 'instrument out of view' parameter, the robot assisted group scored a median of 0% after repetition four. In the laparoscopic group, the instrument out of view increased from 3.1 to 3.9% (left) and from 3.0 to 4.1% (right) between the first and eleventh knot (p > 0.05).ConclusionThe learning curve of minimally invasive suturing shows a shorter task time curve using robotic assistance compared to the laparoscopic curve. However, laparoscopic outcomes show good end results with rapid outcome improvement.
| S-EPMC7326898 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To provide a step-by-step overview of the University of Florence technique for robotic living donor nephrectomy (LDN), focusing on its technical nuances and perioperative outcomes. Methods: A dedicated robotic LDN program at our Institution was codified in 2012. Data from patients undergoing robotic LDN from 2012 to 2019 were prospectively collected. All robotic LDNs were performed by a highly experienced surgeon, using the da Vinci Si robotic platform in a three-arm configuration. In this report we provide a detailed overview of our surgical technique for robotic LDN. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of the technique, including perioperative surgical complications rate and mid-term functional outcomes. Results: Overall, 36 patients undergoing robotic LDNs were included in the study. Of these, 28 (78%) were left LDNs. Median (IQR) donor pre-operative eGFR was 88 (75.6-90) ml/min/1.73 m2. In all cases, robotic LDN was completed without need of conversion. The median (IQR) overall operative time was 230 (195-258) min, while the median console time was 133 (IQR 117-166) min. The median (IQR) warm ischemia time was 175 (140-255) s. No intraoperative adverse events or 90-d major surgical complications were recorded. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 24 months (IQR 11-46), median (IQR) eGFR patients undergoing in living donor nephrectomy was 57.4 (47.9; 63.9) ml/min/1.73 m2. Conclusions: In our experience, robotic LDN is technically feasible and safe. The use of robotic surgery for LDN may provide distinct advantages for surgeons while ensuring optimal donors' perioperative and functional outcomes.
| S-EPMC7844329 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductiondHACM is a source of factors including cytokines that allow anti-inflammatory and proliferative elements to be utilized for wound and ulcer management. We present our experience of using dHACM in a cohort of patients undergoing nerve-sparing (NS) robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). Our objective is to investigate the functional and oncological outcomes of NS after placing amniotic or dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (dHACM) on preserved neurovascular bundles (NVBs). From 2013 to 2019, our institution performed transperitoneal multi-port da Vinci robotic prostatectomy. The NVBs are spared by releasing their fascial planes posteriorly, followed by an anterior release of the plane at a similar level. Once the retrograde release of the NVB is performed then 599 patients underwent placement of dHACM graft (AmnioFix by MiMedx, Marietta, GA, USA). The graft was cut into two 4 × 1 cm pieces and laid over the NVB as a wrap. In order to inform the urological community of oncological and functional outcomes, we excluded patients with less than 12 months follow up (n = 64), benign prostatic hyperplasia (n = 5), and unilateral NS (n = 1). 529 (88%) patients were included in this study who underwent a partial or full bilateral NS with dHACM. 529 patients were followed-up for a median (IQR) of 42 months (25-89). Demographics include median (IQR) age 57 years (52-62), median preoperative SHIM score of 24 (21-15), and AUASS of 5 (2-11). Full NS was performed in 74% (391/529). Pathological staging was pT2 = 399 (75%), pT3a = 107 (20%), pT3b = 19 (4%) and pT4 = 4 (1%) with N1 = 3 (0.6%). The number of patients with PSM was 86 (16%), and the overall BCR in the entire cohort was 10%. Postoperatively, 434 (82%) were sexually active. Median time to potency was 119 (37-420) days and time to continence was 42 (23-91) days. Regarding full vs partial NS: median post op SHIM score 18 (13-20) vs 15 (6-20), median time to potency 92 (35-365) days vs 184 (42-560) days, and median time to continence 42 (23-91) days vs 44 (30-92) days. Age > 55 vs ≤ 55 years: median post op SHIM score 18 (12-20) vs 15 (10-20), median time to potency 167 days (42-549) vs 80 (35-288) days, and median time to continence 42 (25-116) days vs 42 (29-76) days. In our series the application of amniotic membrane/dHACM has led to acceptable post RALP outcomes. The BCR rate of 10% in addition to the recovery of potency at a median time of 3 months and continence at 6 weeks is an encouraging result of dHACM. Our findings indicate that dHACM allowed for an even faster period for continence recovery which was independent of grade of NS. Future comparative studies may further assess the impact of new amniotic membrane types on the functional and oncological outcomes after RALP.
| S-EPMC8749342 | biostudies-literature