Robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform with a focus on optimizing the port position and specimen retrieval

IF 0.9 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Yutaro Sasaki, Narushi Yokota, Shuhei Nozaki, Satoshi Harada, Tetsuhiro Yano, Mitsuki Nishiyama, Saki Kobayashi, Ryoei Minato, Kei Daizumoto, Ryotaro Tomida, Yoshito Kusuhara, Tomoya Fukawa, Kunihisa Yamaguchi, Yasuyo Yamamoto, Masayuki Takahashi, Kazuya Kanda, Hiroomi Kanayama, Junya Furukawa
{"title":"Robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform with a focus on optimizing the port position and specimen retrieval","authors":"Yutaro Sasaki,&nbsp;Narushi Yokota,&nbsp;Shuhei Nozaki,&nbsp;Satoshi Harada,&nbsp;Tetsuhiro Yano,&nbsp;Mitsuki Nishiyama,&nbsp;Saki Kobayashi,&nbsp;Ryoei Minato,&nbsp;Kei Daizumoto,&nbsp;Ryotaro Tomida,&nbsp;Yoshito Kusuhara,&nbsp;Tomoya Fukawa,&nbsp;Kunihisa Yamaguchi,&nbsp;Yasuyo Yamamoto,&nbsp;Masayuki Takahashi,&nbsp;Kazuya Kanda,&nbsp;Hiroomi Kanayama,&nbsp;Junya Furukawa","doi":"10.1111/ases.13386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>One of the factors that makes robot-assisted nephroureterectomy difficult is that the optimal port position differs between nephrectomy and bladder cuff excision. In addition, how best to retrieve the specimen after resection while minimizing the size of the wound is a challenge in robot-assisted surgery. To solve these problems, we designed a surgical technique for robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform with a focus on port position optimization and specimen retrieval. This study describes the surgical technique of GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy and reports our initial experience with this technique.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Between January 2023 and May 2024, seven patients underwent robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform and 11 underwent conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy. We compared the patients' characteristics and surgical outcomes between the two groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Compared with the conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group, the median operative time tended to be shorter in the GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group (280 vs. 357 min, respectively; <i>p</i> = .135). The maximum incision length tended to be longer in the GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group (7.0 vs. 6.0 cm, respectively; <i>p</i> = .078). The incidence of 30-day complications was similar between the two groups (28.5% vs. 18.2%, respectively; <i>p</i> = 1.000). No complications were associated with the use of the GelPoint Platform.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The surgical outcomes of GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy are comparable to those of conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy, and it can be performed safely and effectively. GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy can be considered a feasible alternative for selected patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47019,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ases.13386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

One of the factors that makes robot-assisted nephroureterectomy difficult is that the optimal port position differs between nephrectomy and bladder cuff excision. In addition, how best to retrieve the specimen after resection while minimizing the size of the wound is a challenge in robot-assisted surgery. To solve these problems, we designed a surgical technique for robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform with a focus on port position optimization and specimen retrieval. This study describes the surgical technique of GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy and reports our initial experience with this technique.

Methods

Between January 2023 and May 2024, seven patients underwent robot-assisted nephroureterectomy using the GelPoint Platform and 11 underwent conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy. We compared the patients' characteristics and surgical outcomes between the two groups.

Results

Compared with the conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group, the median operative time tended to be shorter in the GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group (280 vs. 357 min, respectively; p = .135). The maximum incision length tended to be longer in the GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy group (7.0 vs. 6.0 cm, respectively; p = .078). The incidence of 30-day complications was similar between the two groups (28.5% vs. 18.2%, respectively; p = 1.000). No complications were associated with the use of the GelPoint Platform.

Conclusion

The surgical outcomes of GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy are comparable to those of conventional robot-assisted nephroureterectomy, and it can be performed safely and effectively. GelPoint robot-assisted nephroureterectomy can be considered a feasible alternative for selected patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

使用 GelPoint 平台进行机器人辅助肾切除术,重点是优化端口位置和标本检索
引言 机器人辅助肾切除术的难点之一在于肾切除术和膀胱袖带切除术的最佳手术孔位置不同。此外,如何在切除后最好地取回标本,同时尽量缩小伤口也是机器人辅助手术中的一个难题。为了解决这些问题,我们设计了一种使用 GelPoint 平台进行机器人辅助肾切除术的手术技术,重点是端口位置优化和标本取回。本研究描述了 GelPoint 机器人辅助肾切除术的手术技术,并报告了我们使用该技术的初步经验。 方法 2023 年 1 月至 2024 年 5 月期间,7 名患者接受了使用 GelPoint 平台的机器人辅助肾切除术,11 名患者接受了传统的机器人辅助肾切除术。我们比较了两组患者的特征和手术结果。 结果 与传统机器人辅助肾切除术组相比,GelPoint 机器人辅助肾切除术组的中位手术时间往往更短(分别为 280 分钟和 357 分钟;P = .135)。GelPoint机器人辅助肾切除术组的最大切口长度往往更长(分别为7.0厘米和6.0厘米;P = 0.078)。两组的 30 天并发症发生率相似(分别为 28.5% 对 18.2%;P = 1.000)。使用 GelPoint 平台未出现并发症。 结论 GelPoint 机器人辅助肾切除术的手术效果与传统机器人辅助肾切除术相当,而且可以安全有效地进行。GelPoint机器人辅助肾切除术可被视为上尿路上皮癌患者的可行替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
129
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信