Samvel Nikoghosyan, Aristeidis Alevizopoulos, Sheikh Nissar Ahmad, Ezgi Aldemir, Arian Arjomandi Rad, Robert Vardanyan
{"title":"Outcomes of robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy during service implementation: Lessons from an audit.","authors":"Samvel Nikoghosyan, Aristeidis Alevizopoulos, Sheikh Nissar Ahmad, Ezgi Aldemir, Arian Arjomandi Rad, Robert Vardanyan","doi":"10.1177/00369330251314079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) is an extension of minimally invasive surgery rapidly gaining acceptance in many conditions. The study aims to assess and share lessons impact of RAS on the radical nephrectomy (RN) service during the implementation phase.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two separate analyses were carried out: to compare the outcome of all RN - before and after the implementation of RAS regardless of surgical mode, and a direct comparison between two minimal invasive approaches: Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomies (RARNs) and Laparoscopic radical nephrectomies (LRNs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 55 pre- and 45 robotic era RNs: 45 RARNs, 48 LRNs and 7 open radical nephrectomies (ORNs). Following RAS implementation, all RNs transitioned to RARNs. The broader comparison of all RNs in the robotic versus pre-robotic periods revealed significant reductions in estimated blood loss and the length of hospital stay, though operative times were notably longer. In the direct comparison between LRNs and RARNs, no major differences in perioperative outcomes were noted, except for a significantly longer duration of surgery in the RARN group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The introduction of the robotic platform resulted in a paradigm shift in RN service, eliminating ORN and LRN. Despite increasing operative duration, RARNs improved certain perioperative outcomes (specifically length of stay and blood loss) and were favoured over other modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":21683,"journal":{"name":"Scottish Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":"369330251314079"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scottish Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00369330251314079","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) is an extension of minimally invasive surgery rapidly gaining acceptance in many conditions. The study aims to assess and share lessons impact of RAS on the radical nephrectomy (RN) service during the implementation phase.
Methods: Two separate analyses were carried out: to compare the outcome of all RN - before and after the implementation of RAS regardless of surgical mode, and a direct comparison between two minimal invasive approaches: Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomies (RARNs) and Laparoscopic radical nephrectomies (LRNs).
Results: The study included 55 pre- and 45 robotic era RNs: 45 RARNs, 48 LRNs and 7 open radical nephrectomies (ORNs). Following RAS implementation, all RNs transitioned to RARNs. The broader comparison of all RNs in the robotic versus pre-robotic periods revealed significant reductions in estimated blood loss and the length of hospital stay, though operative times were notably longer. In the direct comparison between LRNs and RARNs, no major differences in perioperative outcomes were noted, except for a significantly longer duration of surgery in the RARN group.
Conclusion: The introduction of the robotic platform resulted in a paradigm shift in RN service, eliminating ORN and LRN. Despite increasing operative duration, RARNs improved certain perioperative outcomes (specifically length of stay and blood loss) and were favoured over other modalities.
期刊介绍:
A unique international information source for the latest news and issues concerning the Scottish medical community. Contributions are drawn from Scotland and its medical institutions, through an array of international authors. In addition to original papers, Scottish Medical Journal publishes commissioned educational review articles, case reports, historical articles, and sponsoring society abstracts.This journal is a member of the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE).