Is robot-assisted appendicovesicostomy equivalent to the current gold standard open procedure? A comparative analysis.

Introduction: Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Appendicovesicostomy (RALAPV) is increasingly performed as a minimally invasive alternative to the open appendicovesicostomy (OPAV), but questions remain regarding the efficacy of the RALAPV compared to OPAV.

Objective: To assess and compare outcomes for non-augmented RALAPV to the open surgical approach.

Materials and methods: An IRB approved prospective registry was retrospectively examined to abstract all patients who underwent APV without augment between 2012 and 2023. Baseline demographics, intra and post-operative characteristics, and long-term outcomes were aggregated and compared. P-values were two sided and a p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: 52 children were identified, 19 (36.5%) OAPV and 33 (63.5%) RALAPV. The median age at surgery was 8.5 years for OAPV and 9.3 years for RALAPV (p = 0.29). Longer operative time was noted in the RALPAV group (346 min vs 289 min, p = 0.04), with a lower estimated blood loss (5 cc vs 30 cc, p = 0.003), shorter median length of hospital stay (4 days vs 5 days, p = 0.07), and lower IV morphine administration (0.04 mg/kg/d vs 0.09 mg/kg/d, p = 0.01). Similar surgical reintervention rate was seen in both cohorts (42% OAPV vs 36% RALAPV, p = 0.77). At the end of follow-up, continence was achieved in 18 (95%) OAPV and 33 (100%) RALAPV patients (p = 0.37) CONCLUSIONS: RALAPV shows comparable success to patients who underwent OPAV procedures. The longer follow-up interval for OPAV highlights minimally invasive surgery as a recent adoption.