Christopher C Ballantyne, Kevin M Wymer, Nancy L Sehgel, Ben H Chew, Fuad F Elkhoury, Sri Sivalingam, Matthew D Dunn, Michael S Borofsky, Mitchell R Humphreys
{"title":"Robotic-Assisted Electromagnetic Guidance Improves Success of Percutaneous Access for Nephrolithotomy: A Study of Novices and Experts.","authors":"Christopher C Ballantyne, Kevin M Wymer, Nancy L Sehgel, Ben H Chew, Fuad F Elkhoury, Sri Sivalingam, Matthew D Dunn, Michael S Borofsky, Mitchell R Humphreys","doi":"10.1177/08927790251368775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been a mainstay treatment for large stone burdens since the 1980s, historically offering improved stone-free rates over retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Gaining optimal access into the renal collecting system can be challenging, requiring advanced skills or interventional radiology assistance. The learning curve for fluoroscopic and ultrasonography access can be steep, with only a minority of PCNL access performed by urologists in the United States. This study compares robotic-assisted electromagnetic (EM) guidance to traditional fluoroscopy for obtaining percutaneous renal access between cohorts of novice and expert urologists. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Ten novices and five expert urologists used robotic-assisted EM guidance to obtain access in a modified supine position compared with using fluoroscopy in a traditional prone position in human cadavers. Primary success was defined as papillary access. Performance metrics, including number of puncture attempts, time to access, radiation exposure, and participant confidence, were compared between novices and experts. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Robotic-assisted EM guidance improved success rates for both novices (100% <i>vs</i> 70%) and experts (93% <i>vs</i> 87%) compared with fluoroscopy. Novices showed greater accuracy using robotic assistance (97% <i>vs</i> 37%). The number of insertion attempts decreased with robotic guidance for both groups (novices: 3.42 ± 0.44 <i>vs</i> 1.47 ± 0.19; experts: 2.13 ± 0.36 <i>vs</i> 1.40 ± 0.24; <i>p</i> < 0.002). EM guidance (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and experience (<i>p</i> < 0.05) significantly reduced the time from needle insertion to access (novices: 12.86 ± 2.41 minutes <i>vs</i> 4.49 ± 0.96 minutes; experts: 4.90 ± 1.40 minutes <i>vs</i> 4.09 ± 1.12 minutes). Radiation exposure was notably lower with EM guidance (novices, 1.12 ± 0.17 mGy <i>vs</i> 4.86 ± 0.70 mGy; experts, 0.69 ± 0.12 mGy <i>vs</i> 4.11 ± 1.21 mGy; <i>p</i> < 0.001). Novices felt more confident (5[3-5] <i>vs</i> 2[1-4], <i>p</i> < 0.001) and at ease (5[3-5] <i>vs</i> 2.75[1-3], <i>p</i> < 0.001) with EM guidance. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Robotic-assisted EM guidance improves percutaneous access success, reduces attempts and radiation exposure, and enhances novice confidence and accuracy. This technology could enable urologists to more effectively and safely perform PCNL, especially for less experienced practitioners.</p>","PeriodicalId":15723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endourology","volume":" ","pages":"772-780"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endourology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08927790251368775","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been a mainstay treatment for large stone burdens since the 1980s, historically offering improved stone-free rates over retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Gaining optimal access into the renal collecting system can be challenging, requiring advanced skills or interventional radiology assistance. The learning curve for fluoroscopic and ultrasonography access can be steep, with only a minority of PCNL access performed by urologists in the United States. This study compares robotic-assisted electromagnetic (EM) guidance to traditional fluoroscopy for obtaining percutaneous renal access between cohorts of novice and expert urologists. Methods: Ten novices and five expert urologists used robotic-assisted EM guidance to obtain access in a modified supine position compared with using fluoroscopy in a traditional prone position in human cadavers. Primary success was defined as papillary access. Performance metrics, including number of puncture attempts, time to access, radiation exposure, and participant confidence, were compared between novices and experts. Results: Robotic-assisted EM guidance improved success rates for both novices (100% vs 70%) and experts (93% vs 87%) compared with fluoroscopy. Novices showed greater accuracy using robotic assistance (97% vs 37%). The number of insertion attempts decreased with robotic guidance for both groups (novices: 3.42 ± 0.44 vs 1.47 ± 0.19; experts: 2.13 ± 0.36 vs 1.40 ± 0.24; p < 0.002). EM guidance (p < 0.05) and experience (p < 0.05) significantly reduced the time from needle insertion to access (novices: 12.86 ± 2.41 minutes vs 4.49 ± 0.96 minutes; experts: 4.90 ± 1.40 minutes vs 4.09 ± 1.12 minutes). Radiation exposure was notably lower with EM guidance (novices, 1.12 ± 0.17 mGy vs 4.86 ± 0.70 mGy; experts, 0.69 ± 0.12 mGy vs 4.11 ± 1.21 mGy; p < 0.001). Novices felt more confident (5[3-5] vs 2[1-4], p < 0.001) and at ease (5[3-5] vs 2.75[1-3], p < 0.001) with EM guidance. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted EM guidance improves percutaneous access success, reduces attempts and radiation exposure, and enhances novice confidence and accuracy. This technology could enable urologists to more effectively and safely perform PCNL, especially for less experienced practitioners.
导读:自20世纪80年代以来,经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)一直是治疗大结石负担的主要方法,从历史上看,与逆行肾内手术(RIRS)相比,PCNL可提高结石清除率。获得进入肾收集系统的最佳通道可能具有挑战性,需要高级技能或介入放射辅助。透视和超声检查的学习曲线可能是陡峭的,在美国只有少数泌尿科医生进行PCNL检查。本研究比较了机器人辅助电磁(EM)引导和传统透视在新手和专家泌尿科医师之间获得经皮肾脏通路的效果。方法:10名新手和5名泌尿科专家使用机器人辅助EM引导在改良的仰卧位上获得通道,与传统的俯卧位使用透视进行比较。初次成功被定义为乳头状通路。性能指标,包括穿刺尝试次数、进入时间、辐射暴露和参与者信心,在新手和专家之间进行比较。结果:与透视相比,机器人辅助的EM引导提高了新手(100%对70%)和专家(93%对87%)的成功率。新手在机器人辅助下的准确率更高(97% vs 37%)。在机器人引导下,两组的插入次数均有所减少(新手:3.42±0.44 vs 1.47±0.19;专家:2.13±0.36 vs 1.40±0.24;P < 0.002)。EM指导(p < 0.05)和经验(p < 0.05)显著缩短了从插针到取针的时间(新手:12.86±2.41分钟vs 4.49±0.96分钟;专家:4.90±1.40分钟vs 4.09±1.12分钟)。EM引导下的辐射暴露明显降低(新手,1.12±0.17 mGy vs 4.86±0.70 mGy;专家:0.69±0.12 mGy vs 4.11±1.21 mGy;P < 0.001)。新手在EM指导下感到更自信(5[3-5]vs 2[1-4], p < 0.001)和轻松(5[3-5]vs 2.75[1-3], p < 0.001)。结论:机器人辅助的EM引导提高了经皮穿刺的成功率,减少了尝试次数和辐射暴露,增强了新手的信心和准确性。这项技术可以使泌尿科医生更有效和安全地进行PCNL,特别是对于经验不足的从业者。
期刊介绍:
Journal of Endourology, JE Case Reports, and Videourology are the leading peer-reviewed journal, case reports publication, and innovative videojournal companion covering all aspects of minimally invasive urology research, applications, and clinical outcomes.
The leading journal of minimally invasive urology for over 30 years, Journal of Endourology is the essential publication for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest surgical technologies in endoscopic, laparoscopic, robotic, and image-guided procedures as they apply to benign and malignant diseases of the genitourinary tract. This flagship journal includes the companion videojournal Videourology™ with every subscription. While Journal of Endourology remains focused on publishing rigorously peer reviewed articles, Videourology accepts original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation.
Journal of Endourology coverage includes:
The latest laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic, and image-guided techniques for treating both benign and malignant conditions
Pioneering research articles
Controversial cases in endourology
Techniques in endourology with accompanying videos
Reviews and epochs in endourology
Endourology survey section of endourology relevant manuscripts published in other journals.