Jenny Tran, Matthew Schultzel, Daniel Burgess, Ingle Rommanee
{"title":"A retrospective comparison between DaVinci XI and DaVinci SP robotic-assisted cholecystectomies.","authors":"Jenny Tran, Matthew Schultzel, Daniel Burgess, Ingle Rommanee","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02478-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Determine procedure and patient outcome differences between multiport robotic-assisted cholecystectomies and single port robotic assisted cholecystectomies. We are retrospectively comparing clinical data from patients that have received cholecystectomy procedure using DaVinci XI (MPC) and SP (SPC) by two surgeons between December 2021 and April 2023. There was a total of 119 patients; 99 patients underwent robotic-assisted multiport cholecystectomy using DaVinci XI (MPC) and 20 patients underwent robotic-assisted single port cholecystectomy using DaVinci SP (SPC). Patient data including demographics, robotic operation time and postoperative complications were collected retrospectively and analyzed using unpaired t-test with p-value < 0.05. The comparison will focus on patient demographics, robotic procedure time, post-operative complications between the two patient groups, multiport robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and single port robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications in all 119 patient procedures. There was no significant difference between active procedure time between multiport DaVinci XI and single port DaVinci SP (14.78 ± 9.7, 11.75 ± 3.16 (p = 0.386). The non significance decreases in active procedure time and no intraoperative, postoperative complications suggest single port cholecystectomy can be considered as a safe option for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and should be considered as an alternative for patients especially for cosmetic appeal. This study was reviewed and granted exemption under TUC IRB Review Board (# M-1324).</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"305"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02478-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Determine procedure and patient outcome differences between multiport robotic-assisted cholecystectomies and single port robotic assisted cholecystectomies. We are retrospectively comparing clinical data from patients that have received cholecystectomy procedure using DaVinci XI (MPC) and SP (SPC) by two surgeons between December 2021 and April 2023. There was a total of 119 patients; 99 patients underwent robotic-assisted multiport cholecystectomy using DaVinci XI (MPC) and 20 patients underwent robotic-assisted single port cholecystectomy using DaVinci SP (SPC). Patient data including demographics, robotic operation time and postoperative complications were collected retrospectively and analyzed using unpaired t-test with p-value < 0.05. The comparison will focus on patient demographics, robotic procedure time, post-operative complications between the two patient groups, multiport robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and single port robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications in all 119 patient procedures. There was no significant difference between active procedure time between multiport DaVinci XI and single port DaVinci SP (14.78 ± 9.7, 11.75 ± 3.16 (p = 0.386). The non significance decreases in active procedure time and no intraoperative, postoperative complications suggest single port cholecystectomy can be considered as a safe option for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and should be considered as an alternative for patients especially for cosmetic appeal. This study was reviewed and granted exemption under TUC IRB Review Board (# M-1324).
期刊介绍:
The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.