Robotic kidney transplantation.
Journal
Nature reviews. Urology
ISSN: 1759-4820
Titre abrégé: Nat Rev Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101500082
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Mar 2024
13 Mar 2024
Historique:
accepted:
16
02
2024
medline:
14
3
2024
pubmed:
14
3
2024
entrez:
14
3
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease owing to improved survival and quality of life compared with dialysis. The surgical approach to kidney transplantation has been somewhat stagnant in the past 50 years, with the open approach being the only available option. In this scenario, evidence of reduced surgery-related morbidity after the introduction of robotics into several surgical fields has induced surgeons to consider robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) as an alternative approach to these fragile and immunocompromised patients. Since 2014, when the RAKT technique was standardized thanks to the pioneering collaboration between the Vattikuti Urology Institute and the Medanta hospital (Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta), several centres worldwide implemented RAKT programmes, providing interesting results regarding the safety and feasibility of this procedure. However, RAKT is still considered an alternative procedure to be offered mainly in the living donor setting, owing to various possible drawbacks such as prolonged rewarming time, demanding learning curve, and difficulties in carrying out this procedure in challenging scenarios (such as patients with obesity, severe atherosclerosis of the iliac vessels, deceased donor setting, or paediatric recipients). Nevertheless, the refinement of robotic platforms through the implementation of novel technologies as well as the encouraging results from multicentre collaborations under the umbrella of the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section are currently expanding the boundaries of RAKT, making this surgical procedure a real alternative to the open approach.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38480898
doi: 10.1038/s41585-024-00865-z
pii: 10.1038/s41585-024-00865-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Webster, A. C., Nagler, E. V., Morton, R. L. & Masson, P. Chronic kidney disease. Lancet 389, 1238–1252 (2017).
pubmed: 27887750
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32064-5
de Vries, E. F., Los, J., de Wit, G. A. & Hakkaart-van Roijen, L. Patient, family and productivity costs of end-stage renal disease in the Netherlands; exposing non-healthcare related costs. BMC Nephrol. 22, 1–9 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s12882-021-02548-y
Wang, V., Vilme, H., Maciejewski, M. L. & Boulware, L. E. The economic burden of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease. Semin. Nephrol. 36, 319–330 (2016).
pubmed: 27475662
doi: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2016.05.008
Cabrera, V. J., Hansson, J., Kliger, A. S. & Finkelstein, F. O. Symptom management of the patient with CKD: the role of dialysis. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 12, 687–693 (2017).
pubmed: 28148557
pmcid: 5383375
doi: 10.2215/CJN.01650216
Hariharan, S., Israni, A. K. & Danovitch, G. Long-term survival after kidney transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 729–743 (2021).
pubmed: 34407344
doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2014530
Merrill, J. P., Murray, J. E., Harrison, J. H. & Guild, W. R. Successful homotransplantation of the human kidney between identical twins. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 160, 277–282 (1956).
pubmed: 13278189
doi: 10.1001/jama.1956.02960390027008
Lanfranco, A. R., Castellanos, A. E., Desai, J. P. & Meyers, W. C. Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann. Surg. 239, 14 (2004).
pubmed: 14685095
pmcid: 1356187
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000103020.19595.7d
Zahid, A. et al. Robotic surgery in comparison to the open and laparoscopic approaches in the field of urology: a systematic review. J. Robot. Surg. 17, 11–29 (2023).
pubmed: 35526260
Marzi, V. L. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: is it getting ready for prime time? World J. Transpl. 12, 163–174 (2022).
doi: 10.5500/wjt.v12.i7.163
Gallioli, A., Rivas, J. G., Larcher, A. & Breda, A. Living donor robot-assisted kidney transplantation: a new standard of care? Curr. Urol. Rep. 22, 58 (2021).
pubmed: 34913082
doi: 10.1007/s11934-021-01075-5
Pecoraro, A. et al. Urologists and kidney transplantation: the first European census. Eur. Urol. 82, 336–337 (2022).
pubmed: 35717360
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.05.032
Musquera, M. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: update from the European Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) series. BJU Int. 127, 222–228 (2021).
pubmed: 32770633
doi: 10.1111/bju.15199
Breda, A. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: the European experience. Eur. Urol. 73, 273–281 (2018).
pubmed: 28916408
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.08.028
Breda, A. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation: one year after the beginning. World J. Urol. 35, 1507–1515 (2017).
pubmed: 28229210
doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2006-8
Tzvetanov, I. G. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation in the obese patient: 10-year experience from a single center. Am. J. Transpl. 20, 430–440 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/ajt.15626
Rosales, A. et al. Laparoscopic kidney transplantation. Eur. Urol. 57, 164–167 (2010).
pubmed: 19592155
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.06.035
Modi, P. et al. Retroperitoneoscopic living-donor nephrectomy and laparoscopic kidney transplantation: experience of initial 72 cases. Transplantation 95, 100–105 (2013).
pubmed: 23202533
doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3182795bee
Benedetti, E. & Shapiro, R. Laparoscopic kidney transplantation-novel or novelty? Am. J. Transpl. 11, 1121–1122 (2011).
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03510.x
Menon, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: evolution of a novel procedure utilizing the IDEAL guidelines (IDEAL phase 0 and 1). Eur. Urol. 65, 1001–1009 (2014).
pubmed: 24287316
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.011
Menon, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: a step-by-step description of the Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta technique (IDEAL phase 2a). Eur. Urol. 65, 991–1000 (2014).
pubmed: 24388099
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.006
Ahlawat, R. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia versus open kidney transplantation for patients with end stage renal disease: an ideal stage 2b study. J. Urol. 205, 595–602 (2021).
pubmed: 32941100
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001368
Hoznek, A. et al. Robotic assisted kidney transplantation: an initial experience. J. Urol. 167, 1604–1606 (2002).
pubmed: 11912372
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65162-2
Giulianotti, P. et al. Robotic transabdominal kidney transplantation in a morbidly obese patient. Am. J. Transpl. 10, 1478–1482 (2010).
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03116.x
Oberholzer, J. et al. Minimally invasive robotic kidney transplantation for obese patients previously denied access to transplantation. Am. J. Transpl. 13, 721–728 (2013).
doi: 10.1111/ajt.12078
Pennell, C. P. et al. Practical guide to the Idea, Development and Exploration stages of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations. Br. J. Surg. 103, 607–615 (2016).
pubmed: 26865013
doi: 10.1002/bjs.10115
Rodríguez Faba, O. et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on renal transplantation: update 2018. Eur. Urol. Focus 4, 208–215 (2018).
pubmed: 30033070
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.07.014
Merseburger, A. S. et al. EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology. Eur. Urol. 64, 277–291 (2013).
pubmed: 23764016
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.034
Queiroz, V. N. F. et al. Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery: an international, multicentre observational study. Br. J. Anaesth. 126, 533–543 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.08.058
Hazebroek, E. J. et al. Long-term impact of pneumoperitoneum used for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on renal function and histomorphology in donor and recipient rats. Ann. Surg. 237, 351–357 (2003).
pubmed: 12616118
pmcid: 1514314
doi: 10.1097/01.SLA.0000055272.96210.A0
Piana, A. et al. Three-dimensional augmented reality-guided robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: breaking the limit of atheromatic plaques. Eur. Urol. 82, 419–426 (2022).
pubmed: 35985902
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.003
Campi, R. et al. Robotic versus open kidney transplantation from deceased donors: a prospective observational study. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 39, 36–46 (2022).
pubmed: 35528789
pmcid: 9068739
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.03.007
Peris, A. et al. Implementing a donation after circulatory death program in a setting of donation after brain death activity. Minerva Anestesiol. 84, 1387–1392 (2018).
pubmed: 29808973
doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.18.12635-6
The European Association of Urology. European Textbook on Kidney Transplantation https://www.researchgate.net/profile/SohrabArora/publication/332706188_Robotic_Kidney_Transplantation/links/5cc4fbee92851c8d220992a0/Robotic-Kidney-Transplantation.pdf (EAU, 2017).
Siena, G. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia using grafts with multiple vessels after extracorporeal vascular reconstruction: results from the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section Working Group. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 175–184 (2018).
pubmed: 30049659
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.07.022
Vignolini, G. et al. The University of Florence technique for robot-assisted kidney transplantation: 3-year experience. Front. Surg. 7, 583798 (2020).
Spinoit, A. F. et al. Single-setting robot-assisted kidney transplantation consecutive to single-port laparoscopic nephrectomy in a child and robot-assisted living-related donor nephrectomy: initial Ghent experience. J. Pediatr. Urol. 15, 578–579 (2019).
pubmed: 31519482
doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.08.005
Doumerc, N., Roumiguié, M., Rischmann, P. & Sallusto, F. Totally robotic approach with transvaginal insertion for kidney transplantation. Eur. Urol. 68, 1103–1104 (2015).
pubmed: 26215608
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.026
Vignolini, G. et al. Intraoperative assessment of ureteral and graft reperfusion during robotic kidney transplantation with indocyanine green fluorescence videography. Minerva Urol. Nefrol. 71, 79–84 (2019).
pubmed: 30421596
doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.18.03278-2
Basile, G. et al. Comparison between near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green and infrared imaging: on-bench trial for kidney perfusion analysis. A project of the ESUT-YAUWP group. Minerva Urol. Nefrol. 71, 280–285 (2019).
pubmed: 30895767
doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03353-8
Veneziano, D. et al. Preliminary evaluation of infrared imaging for real-time graft reperfusion assessment during kidney transplant: an ESUT-YAUWP project. Minerva Urol. Nephrol. 75, 126–129 (2023).
pubmed: 36282547
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.05119-9
Alberts, V. P., Idu, M. M., Legemate, D. A., Laguna Pes, M. P. & Minnee, R. C. Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transpl. Int. 27, 593–605 (2014).
pubmed: 24606191
doi: 10.1111/tri.12301
Campi, R. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation allows safe access for transplant renal biopsy and percutaneous procedures. Transpl. Int. 32, 1333–1335 (2019).
pubmed: 31483897
doi: 10.1111/tri.13517
Boggi, U. et al. Robotic renal transplantation: first European case. Transpl. Int. 24, 213–218 (2011).
pubmed: 21091963
doi: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2010.01191.x
Breda, A. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: our first case. World J. Urol. 34, 443–447 (2016).
pubmed: 26314749
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1673-6
Territo, A. et al. European experience of robot-assisted kidney transplantation: minimum of 1-year follow-up. BJU Int. 122, 255–262 (2018).
pubmed: 29645355
doi: 10.1111/bju.14247
Ganpule, A. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplant: a single center experience with median follow-up of 2.8 years. World J. Urol. 38, 2651–2660 (2020).
pubmed: 31489478
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02934-0
Patil, A. et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional open kidney transplantation: a propensity matched comparison with median follow-up of 5 years. Am. J. Clin. Exp. Urol. 11, 168 (2023).
pubmed: 37168935
pmcid: 10165225
Garcia-Roca, R. et al. Single center experience with robotic kidney transplantation for recipients with BMI of 40 kg/m
pubmed: 27152921
doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001249
Kishore, T. A. et al. Robotic assisted kidney transplantation in grafts with multiple vessels: single center experience. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 52, 247–252 (2020).
pubmed: 31586280
doi: 10.1007/s11255-019-02305-z
Ekşi, M. et al. Can robot-assisted kidney transplantation provide higher quality of life than open kidney transplantation during the early postoperative period? Int. J. Clin. Pract. 75, e14288 (2021).
pubmed: 33928721
doi: 10.1111/ijcp.14288
Karadag, S. et al. Comparison of open and robot-assisted kidney transplantation in terms of perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2022, 2663108 (2022).
pubmed: 35685484
pmcid: 9159158
doi: 10.1155/2022/2663108
Tinney, F. et al. Robotic-assisted versus open technique for living donor kidney transplantation: a comparison using propensity score matching for intention to treat. Transpl. Direct 8, E1320 (2022).
doi: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001320
Territo, A. et al. Prospective comparative study of postoperative systemic inflammatory syndrome in robot-assisted vs. open kidney transplantation. World J. Urol. 40, 2153–2159 (2022).
pubmed: 34657175
doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03836-w
Maheshwari, R. et al. Prospective nonrandomized comparison between open and robot-assisted kidney transplantation: analysis of midterm functional outcomes. J. Endourol. 34, 939–945 (2020).
pubmed: 32600060
doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0213
Pein, U. et al. Minimally invasive robotic versus conventional open living donor kidney transplantation. World J. Urol. 38, 795–802 (2020).
pubmed: 31127330
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02814-7
Tuğcu, V. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: comparison of the first 40 cases of open vs robot-assisted transplantations by a single surgeon. BJU Int. 121, 275–280 (2018).
pubmed: 28921838
doi: 10.1111/bju.14014
Liu, G., Deng, Y., Zhang, S., Lin, T. & Guo, H. Robot-assisted versus conventional open kidney transplantation: a meta-analysis. Biomed. Res. Int. 2020, 2358028 (2020).
pubmed: 33344632
pmcid: 7732374
doi: 10.1155/2020/2358028
Madhavan, K., Jena, R., Bhargava, P., Pradhan, A. & Bhandari, M. Comparison of outcomes after open versus robotic kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian. J. Urol. 39, 186 (2023).
pubmed: 37575161
pmcid: 10419774
doi: 10.4103/iju.iju_390_22
Checcucci, E. et al. The metaverse in urology: ready for prime time. The ESUT, ERUS, EULIS, and ESU perspective. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 46, 96–98 (2022).
pubmed: 36388430
pmcid: 9647430
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.10.011
Dell’Oglio, P. et al. Definition of a structured training curriculum for robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit in male patients: a Delphi consensus study led by the ERUS educational board. Eur. Urol. Focus. 8, 160–164 (2022).
pubmed: 33402314
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.12.015
Larcher, A. et al. The ERUS curriculum for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: structure definition and pilot clinical validation. Eur. Urol. 75, 1023–1031 (2019).
pubmed: 30979635
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.031
Campi, R. et al. The first entirely 3D-printed training model for robot-assisted kidney transplantation: the RAKT box. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 53, 98–105 (2023).
pubmed: 37304228
pmcid: 10251129
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.012
Pecoraro, A. et al. The learning curve for open and minimally-invasive kidney transplantation: a systematic review. Minerva Urol. Nephrol. 74, 669–679 (2022).
pubmed: 35622352
Sood, A. et al. Application of the statistical process control method for prospective patient safety monitoring during the learning phase: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia (IDEAL phase 2a-b). Eur. Urol. 66, 371–378 (2014).
pubmed: 24631408
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.055
Bansal, D., Chaturvedi, S., Maheshwari, R., Bansal, A. & Kumar, A. Establishing a robot-assisted kidney transplant program: independent evaluation of the learning curve and surgical nuances. J. Endourol. 35, 1650–1658 (2021).
pubmed: 33573461
doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0923
Gallioli, A. et al. Learning curve in robot-assisted kidney transplantation: results from the European Robotic Urological Society Working Group. Eur. Urol. 78, 239–247 (2020).
pubmed: 31928760
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.12.008
Ahlawat, R. K. et al. Learning curves and timing of surgical trials: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia. J. Endourol. 32, 1160–1165 (2018).
pubmed: 29587531
doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0697
Collins, J. W. et al. Utilising the Delphi process to develop a proficiency-based progression train-the-trainer course for robotic surgery training. Eur. Urol. 75, 775–785 (2019).
pubmed: 30665812
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.044
Mazzone, E. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of proficiency-based progression simulation training on performance outcomes. Ann. Surg. 274, 281–289 (2021).
pubmed: 33630473
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004650
Tiong, H. Y., Goh, B. Y. S., Chiong, E., Tan, L. G. L. & Vathsala, A. Robotic kidney autotransplantation in a porcine model: a procedure-specific training platform for the simulation of robotic intracorporeal vascular anastomosis. J. Robot. Surg. 12, 693–698 (2018).
pubmed: 29605864
doi: 10.1007/s11701-018-0806-5
Denizet, G., Calame, P., Lihoreau, T., Kleinclauss, F. & Aubry, S. 3D multi-tissue printing for kidney transplantation. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 9, 101–106 (2019).
pubmed: 30788251
pmcid: 6351812
doi: 10.21037/qims.2018.10.16
Saba, P. et al. Development of a high-fidelity robot-assisted kidney transplant simulation platform using three-dimensional printing and hydrogel casting technologies. J. Endourol. 34, 1088–1094 (2020).
pubmed: 32597220
doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0441
Grammens, J. et al. Pediatric challenges in robot-assisted kidney transplantation. Front. Surg. 8, 649418 (2021).
pubmed: 33842532
pmcid: 8030256
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.649418
Bansal, A., Maheshwari, R., Chaturvedi, S., Bansal, D. & Kumar, A. Comparative analysis of outcomes and long-term follow-up of robot-assisted pediatric kidney transplantation, with open counterpart. Pediatr. Transpl. 25, (2021).
Casale, P. Laparoscopic and robotic approach to genitourinary anomalies in children. Urol. Clin. North. Am. 37, 279–286 (2010).
pubmed: 20569805
doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2010.03.005
Segev, D. L. et al. Obesity impacts access to kidney transplantation. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 19, 349–355 (2008).
pubmed: 18094366
pmcid: 2396750
doi: 10.1681/ASN.2007050610
Lynch, R. J. et al. Obesity, surgical site infection, and outcome following renal transplantation. Ann. Surg. 250, 1014–1020 (2009).
pubmed: 19779327
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b4ee9a
Spaggiari, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation from deceased donors: a single-center experience. Am. J. Transpl. 23, 642–648 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.ajt.2023.02.016
Huang, E. & Bunnapradist, S. Pre-transplant weight loss and survival after kidney transplantation. Am. J. Nephrol. 41, 448–455 (2015).
pubmed: 26228385
doi: 10.1159/000437341
Prudhomme, T. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation in obese recipients compared to non-obese recipients: the European experience. World J. Urol. 39, 1287–1298 (2021).
pubmed: 32562044
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03309-6
Orandi, B. J. et al. Obesity as an isolated contraindication to kidney transplantation in the end-stage renal disease population: a cohort study. Obesity 29, 1538–1546 (2021).
pubmed: 34338423
doi: 10.1002/oby.23195
Spaggiari, M. et al. Minimally invasive, robot-assisted procedure for kidney transplantation among morbidly obese: positive outcomes at 5 years post-transplant. Clin. Transplant. 32, e13404 (2018).
pubmed: 30216555
doi: 10.1111/ctr.13404
Lee, S. D. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation is a safe alternative approach for morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal disease. Int. J. Med. Robot. 17, e2293 (2021).
pubmed: 34080270
doi: 10.1002/rcs.2293
Spaggiari, M. et al. Simultaneous robotic kidney transplantation and bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal failure. Am. J. Transpl. 21, 1525–1534 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/ajt.16322
Vignolini, G. et al. Development of a robot-assisted kidney transplantation programme from deceased donors in a referral academic centre: technical nuances and preliminary results. BJU Int. 123, 474–484 (2019).
pubmed: 30311992
doi: 10.1111/bju.14588
Vignolini, G. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation from a brain-dead deceased donor in a patient with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: first case report. J. Endourol. Case Rep. 4, 124–128 (2018).
pubmed: 30094337
pmcid: 6083208
doi: 10.1089/cren.2018.0050
Klatte, T. et al. A Literature review of renal surgical anatomy and surgical strategies for partial nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. 68, 980–992 (2015).
pubmed: 25911061
pmcid: 4994971
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.010
Partin, A. W., Peters, C. A., Kavoussi, L. R., Dmochowski, R. R. & Wein, A. J. Campbell-Walsh-Wein Urology, Twelfth Ed. 4096 (2021).
Nataraj, S. A., Zafar, F. A., Ghosh, P. & Ahlawat, R. Feasibility and functional outcome of robotic assisted kidney transplantation using grafts with multiple vessels: comparison to propensity matched contemporary open kidney transplants cohort. Front. Surg. 7, 51 (2020).
pubmed: 33195380
pmcid: 7477351
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.00051
Wotkowicz, C. & Libertino, J. A. Renal autotransplantation. BJU Int. 93, 253–257 (2004).
pubmed: 14764117
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04596.x
Gordon, Z. N., Angell, J. & Abaza, R. Completely intracorporeal robotic renal autotransplantation. J. Urol. 192, 1516–1522 (2014).
pubmed: 24960467
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.2589
Alameddine, M. et al. Kidney autotransplantation: between the past and the future. Curr. Urol. Rep. 19, 7 (2018).
Hardy, J. D. High ureteral injuries. Management by autotransplantation of the kidney. JAMA 184, 97–101 (1963).
pubmed: 13960761
doi: 10.1001/jama.1963.03700150051008
Lee, J. Y., Alzahrani, T. & Ordon, M. Intra-corporeal robotic renal auto-transplantation. Can. Urol. Assoc. J. 9, E748–E749 (2015).
pubmed: 26664514
pmcid: 4662430
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.3015
Sood, A. et al. Minimally invasive kidney transplantation: perioperative considerations and key 6-month outcomes. Transplantation 99, 316–323 (2015).
pubmed: 25606784
doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000000590
Araki, M. et al. Robotic renal autotransplantation: first case outside of North America. Acta Med. Okayama 71, 351–355 (2017).
pubmed: 28824192
Decaestecker, K. et al. Robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation: a minimally invasive way to salvage kidneys. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 198–205 (2018).
pubmed: 30093358
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.07.019
Breda, A. et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation: experience of the ERUS RAKT working group. Eur. Urol. 81, 168–175 (2022).
pubmed: 34393012
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.07.023
Vigués, F. et al. Orthotopic robot-assisted kidney transplantation: first case report. World J. Urol. 39, 2811–2813 (2021).
pubmed: 32468111
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03269-x
Serni, S. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: the University of Florence technique. Front. Surg. 7, 588215 (2021).
pubmed: 33521044
pmcid: 7844329
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.588215
Territo, A. et al. Step-by-step development of a cold ischemia device for open and robotic-assisted renal transplantation. Eur. Urol. 80, 738–745 (2021).
pubmed: 34059396
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.026
Garisto, J. et al. Single port robot-assisted transperitoneal kidney transplant using the SP® surgical system in a pre-clinical model. Int. Braz. J. Urol. 46, 680–681 (2020).
pubmed: 32374143
pmcid: 7239304
doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.191
Eltemamy, M., Garisto, J., Miller, E., Wee, A. & Kaouk, J. Single port robotic extra-peritoneal dual kidney transplantation: initial preclinical experience and description of the technique. Urology 134, 232–236 (2019).
pubmed: 31542461
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.09.007
Kaouk, J. et al. Initial experience with single-port robotic-assisted kidney transplantation and autotransplantation. Eur. Urol. 80, 366–373 (2021).
pubmed: 33810922
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.03.002
Kaouk, J. et al. Single port robotic kidney autotransplantation: initial case series and description of technique. Urology 176, 87–93 (2023).
pubmed: 36921843
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.02.030
Meier, R. P. H. et al. Intra-abdominal cooling system limits ischemia-reperfusion injury during robot-assisted renal transplantation. Am. J. Transpl. 18, 53–62 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/ajt.14399
Fan, Y. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: initial experience with a modified hypothermia technique. Urol. Int. 106, 504–511 (2022).
pubmed: 35152213
doi: 10.1159/000521959
Checcucci, E. et al. 3D imaging applications for robotic urologic surgery: an ESUT YAUWP review. World J. Urol. 38, 869–881 (2020).
pubmed: 31456017
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02922-4
Checcucci, E. et al. Metaverse surgical planning with three-dimensional virtual models for minimally invasive partial nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2023.07.015 (2023).
Porpiglia, F. et al. Current use of three-dimensional model technology in urology: a road map for personalised surgical planning. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 652–656 (2018).
pubmed: 30293946
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.09.012
Song, C., Cheng, L., Li, Y., Kreaden, U. & Snyder, S. R. Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer. BMJ Open 12, e058394 (2022).
pubmed: 36127082
pmcid: 9490571
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058394
Labban, M. et al. Cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer in the UK. JAMA Netw. Open. 5, e225740–e225740 (2022).
pubmed: 35377424
pmcid: 8980901
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.5740