机器人泌尿外科门诊手术:基于证据的分析。

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Angelo Orsini, Francesco Lasorsa, Gabriele Bignante, Michele Marchioni, Luigi Schips, Giuseppe Lucarelli, Francesco Porpiglia, Jihad H Kaouk, Simone Crivellaro, Riccardo Autorino
{"title":"机器人泌尿外科门诊手术:基于证据的分析。","authors":"Angelo Orsini, Francesco Lasorsa, Gabriele Bignante, Michele Marchioni, Luigi Schips, Giuseppe Lucarelli, Francesco Porpiglia, Jihad H Kaouk, Simone Crivellaro, Riccardo Autorino","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2024.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>One of the primary advantages of minimally invasive surgery is the shorter hospitalization time, which can potentially allow \"outpatient\" (OP) procedures. The recent advent of single-port (SP) robotics has further fueled the debate on this topic. We sought to provide an evidence-based analysis of the safety, feasibility, and advantages of robotic urological surgery in the OP setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search in PubMed was conducted in June 2024 to identify studies on the feasibility and safety of OP robotic urological surgery. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome model were used to select retrospective and prospective studies. Data collected included patient characteristics, operative outcomes, same-day discharge (SDD), and complication and readmission rates. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data analysis and synthesis were performed using Review Manager and GraphPad Prism.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>For 3291 patients in noncomparative studies, we found SDD rates of 46.17% for multiport (MP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), 77.35% for SP-RARP, 93.1% for robot-assisted radical or partial nephrectomy, and 93.3% for adrenalectomy. Among comparative studies involving 4130 patients, we found that the OP setting is feasible and safe. Comparison of overall complications between OP and inpatients (IP) settings revealed a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.91; p = 0.01) favoring OP. The risk of readmission was lower risk for OP than for IP surgery (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85; p = 0.008). Comparison of MP-RARP and SP-RARP revealed that OP protocols are more easily achievable with SP-RARP (44.20% vs 79.59%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>OP robotic urological surgery is feasible and safe in selected patients and can enhance satisfaction and reduce costs. SP robotics could promote wider adoption of SDD protocols. Strict case selection minimizes complications. Differences in health care systems should be considered in future evaluations.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We examined the feasibility and safety of same-day hospital discharge after robot-assisted surgery for urology operations. We found that this option can be safely offered and may be even more viable if the use of robots allowing surgery through a single keyhole incision becomes more widespread.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outpatient Robotic Urological Surgery: An Evidence-based Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Angelo Orsini, Francesco Lasorsa, Gabriele Bignante, Michele Marchioni, Luigi Schips, Giuseppe Lucarelli, Francesco Porpiglia, Jihad H Kaouk, Simone Crivellaro, Riccardo Autorino\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.euf.2024.10.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>One of the primary advantages of minimally invasive surgery is the shorter hospitalization time, which can potentially allow \\\"outpatient\\\" (OP) procedures. The recent advent of single-port (SP) robotics has further fueled the debate on this topic. We sought to provide an evidence-based analysis of the safety, feasibility, and advantages of robotic urological surgery in the OP setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search in PubMed was conducted in June 2024 to identify studies on the feasibility and safety of OP robotic urological surgery. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome model were used to select retrospective and prospective studies. Data collected included patient characteristics, operative outcomes, same-day discharge (SDD), and complication and readmission rates. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data analysis and synthesis were performed using Review Manager and GraphPad Prism.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>For 3291 patients in noncomparative studies, we found SDD rates of 46.17% for multiport (MP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), 77.35% for SP-RARP, 93.1% for robot-assisted radical or partial nephrectomy, and 93.3% for adrenalectomy. Among comparative studies involving 4130 patients, we found that the OP setting is feasible and safe. Comparison of overall complications between OP and inpatients (IP) settings revealed a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.91; p = 0.01) favoring OP. The risk of readmission was lower risk for OP than for IP surgery (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85; p = 0.008). Comparison of MP-RARP and SP-RARP revealed that OP protocols are more easily achievable with SP-RARP (44.20% vs 79.59%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>OP robotic urological surgery is feasible and safe in selected patients and can enhance satisfaction and reduce costs. SP robotics could promote wider adoption of SDD protocols. Strict case selection minimizes complications. Differences in health care systems should be considered in future evaluations.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We examined the feasibility and safety of same-day hospital discharge after robot-assisted surgery for urology operations. We found that this option can be safely offered and may be even more viable if the use of robots allowing surgery through a single keyhole incision becomes more widespread.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology focus\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.10.003\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.10.003","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

摘要

背景和目的:微创手术的主要优势之一是缩短住院时间,从而有可能实现 "门诊"(OP)手术。最近单孔(SP)机器人技术的出现进一步加剧了对这一话题的争论。我们试图对机器人泌尿外科手术在门诊环境下的安全性、可行性和优势进行循证分析:我们于 2024 年 6 月在 PubMed 上进行了文献检索,以确定有关 OP 机器人泌尿外科手术可行性和安全性的研究。在选择回顾性和前瞻性研究时,采用了系统综述和Meta分析的首选报告项目标准以及 "人群、干预、比较者、结果 "模型。收集的数据包括患者特征、手术结果、当日出院(SDD)、并发症和再入院率。研究质量采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估。使用Review Manager和GraphPad Prism进行数据分析和综合:在非对比研究的 3291 例患者中,我们发现多孔口(MP)机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)的 SDD 率为 46.17%,SP-RARP 为 77.35%,机器人辅助根治性或部分肾切除术为 93.1%,肾上腺切除术为 93.3%。在涉及 4130 名患者的对比研究中,我们发现 OP 环境是可行且安全的。比较 OP 和住院患者 (IP) 的总体并发症发现,OP 的相对风险 (RR) 为 0.66(95% 置信区间 [CI] 0.48-0.91;P = 0.01)。OP 手术的再入院风险低于 IP 手术(RR 0.53,95% CI 0.33-0.85;P = 0.008)。MP-RARP和SP-RARP的比较显示,SP-RARP更容易实现OP方案(44.20% vs 79.59%; p 结论和临床意义:在选定的患者中,OP机器人泌尿外科手术是可行且安全的,可提高满意度并降低成本。SP机器人可促进SDD方案的广泛采用。严格选择病例可将并发症降至最低。患者摘要:我们研究了泌尿外科机器人辅助手术后当天出院的可行性和安全性。我们发现可以安全地提供这种选择,如果通过单个锁孔切口进行手术的机器人得到更广泛的使用,这种选择可能会更加可行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outpatient Robotic Urological Surgery: An Evidence-based Analysis.

Background and objective: One of the primary advantages of minimally invasive surgery is the shorter hospitalization time, which can potentially allow "outpatient" (OP) procedures. The recent advent of single-port (SP) robotics has further fueled the debate on this topic. We sought to provide an evidence-based analysis of the safety, feasibility, and advantages of robotic urological surgery in the OP setting.

Methods: A literature search in PubMed was conducted in June 2024 to identify studies on the feasibility and safety of OP robotic urological surgery. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome model were used to select retrospective and prospective studies. Data collected included patient characteristics, operative outcomes, same-day discharge (SDD), and complication and readmission rates. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data analysis and synthesis were performed using Review Manager and GraphPad Prism.

Key findings and limitations: For 3291 patients in noncomparative studies, we found SDD rates of 46.17% for multiport (MP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), 77.35% for SP-RARP, 93.1% for robot-assisted radical or partial nephrectomy, and 93.3% for adrenalectomy. Among comparative studies involving 4130 patients, we found that the OP setting is feasible and safe. Comparison of overall complications between OP and inpatients (IP) settings revealed a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.91; p = 0.01) favoring OP. The risk of readmission was lower risk for OP than for IP surgery (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85; p = 0.008). Comparison of MP-RARP and SP-RARP revealed that OP protocols are more easily achievable with SP-RARP (44.20% vs 79.59%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions and clinical implications: OP robotic urological surgery is feasible and safe in selected patients and can enhance satisfaction and reduce costs. SP robotics could promote wider adoption of SDD protocols. Strict case selection minimizes complications. Differences in health care systems should be considered in future evaluations.

Patient summary: We examined the feasibility and safety of same-day hospital discharge after robot-assisted surgery for urology operations. We found that this option can be safely offered and may be even more viable if the use of robots allowing surgery through a single keyhole incision becomes more widespread.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
×
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