Robotic Single-Port Platform in General, Urologic, and Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis.
Journal
World journal of surgery
ISSN: 1432-2323
Titre abrégé: World J Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7704052
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2019
10 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
13
6
2019
medline:
29
1
2020
entrez:
13
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Robotic platforms have recently acquired progressive importance in different surgical fields, such as urology, gynecology, and general surgery. Through the years, new surgical robots have become available as single-port robotic platform. The study is aimed to value the single-port robotic platform characteristics in different surgical specialties. The terms "LESS" OR "single port" OR "single site" AND "robot" OR "robotic" were systematically used to search the PubMed and Scopus databases. A total of 57 studies were considered eligible for the present review. The articles included were divided according to the surgical field in which the study was conducted: General surgery (29 articles), Gynecology (18 articles), Urology (10 articles). Most part of the articles showed the feasibility of robotic single-port surgical procedures and described advantages in terms of cosmetic, hospital stay, and in some series even cost reduction. A meta-analysis was conducted, showing a significant increment of complications using RSP if compared with SLPS and a trend (P = 0.008) when RSP was compared with LESS. The comparison of different techniques in terms of conversion to laparotomy did not show any significant difference. Robotic single port potentially furnishes an important surgical and post-operatory improvement; however, some limits still prolong the surgical time and complication rate.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Robotic platforms have recently acquired progressive importance in different surgical fields, such as urology, gynecology, and general surgery. Through the years, new surgical robots have become available as single-port robotic platform. The study is aimed to value the single-port robotic platform characteristics in different surgical specialties.
METHODS
The terms "LESS" OR "single port" OR "single site" AND "robot" OR "robotic" were systematically used to search the PubMed and Scopus databases. A total of 57 studies were considered eligible for the present review. The articles included were divided according to the surgical field in which the study was conducted: General surgery (29 articles), Gynecology (18 articles), Urology (10 articles).
RESULTS
Most part of the articles showed the feasibility of robotic single-port surgical procedures and described advantages in terms of cosmetic, hospital stay, and in some series even cost reduction. A meta-analysis was conducted, showing a significant increment of complications using RSP if compared with SLPS and a trend (P = 0.008) when RSP was compared with LESS. The comparison of different techniques in terms of conversion to laparotomy did not show any significant difference.
CONCLUSION
Robotic single port potentially furnishes an important surgical and post-operatory improvement; however, some limits still prolong the surgical time and complication rate.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31187247
doi: 10.1007/s00268-019-05049-0
pii: 10.1007/s00268-019-05049-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2401-2419Références
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Dec;15(12):2182-6
pubmed: 21948180
J Endourol. 2011 Sep;25(9):1481-5
pubmed: 21902517
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 May - Jun;25(4):644-650
pubmed: 29081384
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 May - Jun;24(4):683-684
pubmed: 28189776
J Robot Surg. 2018 Jun;12(2):229-234
pubmed: 28624984
Surg Endosc. 2016 Mar;30(3):1043-50
pubmed: 26092018
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Oct;42(10):1506-11
pubmed: 27612413
World J Surg. 2017 May;41(5):1246-1253
pubmed: 28058471
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Jul-Aug;21(4):689-94
pubmed: 24530696
Eur Urol. 2015 Jan;67(1):151-156
pubmed: 24656756
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Sep - Oct;24(6):977-983
pubmed: 28599884
Asian J Surg. 2014 Jul;37(3):115-9
pubmed: 24210536
Eur Urol. 2013 May;63(5):941-6
pubmed: 23219087
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Mar - Apr;25(3):461-466.e1
pubmed: 29038041
J Robot Surg. 2018 Sep;12(3):447-454
pubmed: 29027639
J Pediatr Surg. 2015 Nov;50(11):1842-5
pubmed: 25888273
Surg Endosc. 2015 Jul;29(7):1976-81
pubmed: 25303915
J Robot Surg. 2017 Mar;11(1):27-35
pubmed: 27165100
BMJ. 2008 Apr 26;336(7650):924-6
pubmed: 18436948
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017 Apr;27(4):434-437
pubmed: 27992297
Eur Urol. 2012 Feb;61(2):410-4
pubmed: 22036645
Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2015;80(2):93-8
pubmed: 25634553
BMJ. 2015 Jan 02;350:g7647
pubmed: 25555855
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 May - Jun;24(4):632-639
pubmed: 28215514
Int J Med Robot. 2017 Dec;13(4):
pubmed: 28875529
Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):2951-60
pubmed: 26541728
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 May - Jun;24(4):529-530
pubmed: 27989810
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;212(2):179.e1-8
pubmed: 25088863
BJU Int. 2014 Oct;114(4):555-61
pubmed: 24957902
Surg Endosc. 2017 Aug;31(8):3242-3250
pubmed: 27864724
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017 Sep;216:125-129
pubmed: 28753500
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Nov - Dec;25(7):1249-1254
pubmed: 29551477
Int J Med Robot. 2017 Sep;13(3):
pubmed: 27860142
Arch Surg. 2012 Aug;147(8):709-14
pubmed: 22508669
JSLS. 2015 Jan-Mar;19(1):e2014.00218
pubmed: 25848182
Surg Endosc. 2016 Aug;30(8):3351-6
pubmed: 26487220
Eur Urol. 2011 May;59(5):815-22
pubmed: 21334805
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015 Jul-Aug;11(4):882-5
pubmed: 25547055
Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Jul;130(1):219-23
pubmed: 23583415
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016 Nov;26(11):857-861
pubmed: 27258800
Surg Endosc. 2012 Sep;26(9):2687-94
pubmed: 22476831
Surg Endosc. 2013 Mar;27(3):1021
pubmed: 23052525
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Jul - Aug;25(5):816-822
pubmed: 29269126
Int J Med Robot. 2016 Dec;12(4):694-700
pubmed: 26450129
Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):3089-97
pubmed: 26497946
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015 May;25(5):386-91
pubmed: 25839384
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2017 Sep 06;22:30-33
pubmed: 28932394
Surg Endosc. 2018 Mar;32(3):1550-1555
pubmed: 29052069
J Urol. 2012 May;187(5):1696-701
pubmed: 22425120
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2014 Jan;21(1):18-25
pubmed: 24142898
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Oct;94(42):e1871
pubmed: 26496344
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 May-Jun;23(4):603-9
pubmed: 26898895
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Aug;203:132-5
pubmed: 27289066
J Robot Surg. 2018 Sep;12(3):575-577
pubmed: 29363006
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 Mar-Apr;23(3):378-83
pubmed: 26602025
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Feb;24(2):323-328
pubmed: 27867048
J Robot Surg. 2018 Mar;12(1):87-92
pubmed: 28429119
Surg Endosc. 2013 Dec;27(12):4524-31
pubmed: 23943118
Eur Urol. 2013 Feb;63(2):266-80
pubmed: 22940173
Surg Endosc. 2012 Jun;26(6):1648-55
pubmed: 22179472
Can Urol Assoc J. 2016 Mar-Apr;10(3-4):83-8
pubmed: 27217850
Arch Surg. 2011 Oct;146(10):1122-7
pubmed: 21690436
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;126(1):151-4
pubmed: 26241268
J Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Jan;29(1):e2
pubmed: 29185260
Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Aug;20(8):2759-64
pubmed: 23468046
Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Mar;140(3):575-6
pubmed: 26802984
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017 May/Jun;23(3):e14-e18
pubmed: 28134702
Eur Urol. 2014 Dec;66(6):1033-43
pubmed: 25041850
Eur Urol. 2010 Oct;58(4):544-50
pubmed: 20702030
Surg Endosc. 2011 Nov;25(11):3566-73
pubmed: 21638179
Int J Med Robot. 2015 Jun;11(2):159-65
pubmed: 25231021
Int J Med Robot. 2013 Sep;9(3):365-70
pubmed: 23640914
Surg Endosc. 2018 May;32(5):2402-2408
pubmed: 29218659
Asian J Surg. 2017 Nov;40(6):424-428
pubmed: 27188234