Robot-assisted pyeloplasty with the New Hugo™ RAS: step-by-step surgical settings and technique.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Alberto Ragusa, Francesco Prata, Andrea Iannuzzi, Francesco Tedesco, Matteo Pira, Angelo Civitella, Loris Cacciatore, Giovanni Muto, Roberto Scarpa, Rocco Papalia
{"title":"Robot-assisted pyeloplasty with the New Hugo™ RAS: step-by-step surgical settings and technique.","authors":"Alberto Ragusa, Francesco Prata, Andrea Iannuzzi, Francesco Tedesco, Matteo Pira, Angelo Civitella, Loris Cacciatore, Giovanni Muto, Roberto Scarpa, Rocco Papalia","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06067-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We present our step-by-step experience regarding the feasibility and surgical setup for a case series of robotic pyeloplasty using the new Hugo<sup>™</sup> RAS System.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five consecutives robotic pyeloplasties have been performed, through a trans-peritoneal route. Three robotic ports were placed under direct vision, including an optical 11-mm robotic trocar, and two 8-mm operative robotic ports. Two laparoscopic ports for bed-assistant were placed between robotic ports and below the camera port to avoid clashes. Only three arm carts were used and located behind the back of the patient to leave more working space to the bed-assistant space and avoid internal or external clashes between robotic arms. After docking and paracolic gutter incision, kidney lower pole identification, UPJ stenosis excision, and spatulation of the ureter with double J ureteral catheter placement were key steps of our procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median Docking and Console time were 4 minutes (IQR: 4-5) and 115 minutes (IQR:105-120), respectively. No intraoperative complications occurred. No additional ports placement was necessary. No robotic instrument clashed, nor clashes between the robotic arms and the bed-assistant were observed. Estimated blood loss was negligible. The patients were discharged on postoperative day 3 after bladder catheter and abdominal drain removal. No complications were recorded within the first 30 postoperative days. Finally, a median follow-up of 4 (IQR: 3-8) reported satisfactory outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the setting of robotic pyeloplasty, this novel platform showed a user-friendly docking system, providing satisfactory perioperative outcomes with a simple three-arms configuration.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06067-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We present our step-by-step experience regarding the feasibility and surgical setup for a case series of robotic pyeloplasty using the new Hugo RAS System.

Methods: Five consecutives robotic pyeloplasties have been performed, through a trans-peritoneal route. Three robotic ports were placed under direct vision, including an optical 11-mm robotic trocar, and two 8-mm operative robotic ports. Two laparoscopic ports for bed-assistant were placed between robotic ports and below the camera port to avoid clashes. Only three arm carts were used and located behind the back of the patient to leave more working space to the bed-assistant space and avoid internal or external clashes between robotic arms. After docking and paracolic gutter incision, kidney lower pole identification, UPJ stenosis excision, and spatulation of the ureter with double J ureteral catheter placement were key steps of our procedure.

Results: Median Docking and Console time were 4 minutes (IQR: 4-5) and 115 minutes (IQR:105-120), respectively. No intraoperative complications occurred. No additional ports placement was necessary. No robotic instrument clashed, nor clashes between the robotic arms and the bed-assistant were observed. Estimated blood loss was negligible. The patients were discharged on postoperative day 3 after bladder catheter and abdominal drain removal. No complications were recorded within the first 30 postoperative days. Finally, a median follow-up of 4 (IQR: 3-8) reported satisfactory outcomes.

Conclusions: In the setting of robotic pyeloplasty, this novel platform showed a user-friendly docking system, providing satisfactory perioperative outcomes with a simple three-arms configuration.

机器人辅助肾盂成形术与新Hugo™RAS:一步一步的手术设置和技术。
背景:我们介绍了我们关于使用新的Hugo™RAS系统进行机器人肾盂成形术的可行性和手术设置的逐步经验。方法:通过经腹膜途径连续进行5例机器人肾盂成形术。三个机器人端口放置在直接视觉下,包括一个光学11毫米机器人套管针和两个8毫米手术机器人端口。两个用于床上助手的腹腔镜端口被放置在机器人端口之间和相机端口下方,以避免冲突。仅使用三个手臂推车,并位于患者背后,为床辅助空间留出更多的工作空间,避免机械手臂内部或外部冲突。在结扎和结肠旁沟切开后,确定肾下极,切除UPJ狭窄,双J输尿管置管行输尿管切开是我们手术的关键步骤。结果:中位对接和控制台时间分别为4分钟(IQR: 4-5)和115分钟(IQR:105-120)。无术中并发症发生。不需要放置额外的端口。没有观察到机器人仪器发生碰撞,也没有观察到机器人手臂与床上助手之间的碰撞。估计失血量可以忽略不计。患者于术后第3天拔除膀胱导尿管及腹腔引流管出院。术后30天无并发症发生。最后,中位随访4例(IQR: 3-8)报告了满意的结果。结论:在机器人肾盂成形术中,这种新型平台具有用户友好的对接系统,简单的三臂结构提供了满意的围手术期效果。
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
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信