“Transition from open to robotic-assisted pediatric pyeloplasty: A feasibility and outcome study.”
O’Brien, S. T. and A. R. Shukla (2011).
Journal of Pediatric Urology.
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic reconstructive procedures in the pediatric patient are associated with a steep learning curve. Outcomes from robotic-assisted pediatric urology have been reported by surgeons with known facility in laparoscopic surgery. We describe the experience of a single surgeon in transitioning from open to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) without previous training in traditional laparoscopic pyeloplasty or intracorporeal suturing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our experience with 20 (mean age 7.4 years) consecutive children undergoing RALP for ureteropelvic junction obstruction at our institution over 36 months. Additionally, a literature search was conducted to identify age-similar patient groups who underwent open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty. RESULTS: Length of hospitalization and postoperative analgesia requirement were greater in the age-similar open pyeloplasty group compared to the other two groups. Intraoperative times were greater in the laparoscopic and RALP groups compared to the open pyeloplasty group. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience confirms the feasibility of transitioning from open to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty without previous experience in conventional laparoscopy. Outcomes, analgesic requirement and hospitalization for the patients from our institution are comparable to the laparoscopy patient group and improved compared to open pyeloplasty patients from the literature.
“Complex robotic reconstructive surgical procedures in children with urologic abnormalities.”
Orvieto, M. A. and M. S. Gundeti (2011).
Current Opinion in Urology.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) is evolving rapidly in the pediatric surgical field. The unique attributes of the robotic interface makes this technology ideal for children with congenital anomalies who often require reconstructive procedures. Furthermore, the system can generate extremely delicate movements in a confined working space such as the one generally found in the pediatric population. Herein, we critically review the current experience with RALS placing a special emphasis in children undergoing complex reconstructive surgical procedures worldwide. RECENT FINDINGS: A total of 42 original manuscripts on a variety of robot-assisted urologic surgical procedures in children were identified from a MEDLINE database search. Complex reconstructive procedures that are being currently performed include reoperative pyeloplasty, pyeloplasty in infants, pyelolithotomy, ureteropyelostomy/ureterostomy, bladder augmentation with or without appendico-vesicostomy, bladder neck sling procedure, among others. SUMMARY: Initial results with robot assistance are encouraging and have demonstrated safety comparable to open procedures and outcomes at least equivalent to standard laparoscopy. Future development of smaller instruments, incorporating tactile feedback, will likely overcome current limitations and spread out the use of this technique in younger children and more advanced procedures.
Peters, C. A. (2011).
Journal of Urology 185(6 Suppl): 2522.
“Comparison of the learning curve and outcomes of robotic assisted pediatric pyeloplasty.”
Sorensen, M. D., C. Delostrinos, et al. (2011).
Journal of Urology 185(6 SUPPL.): 2517-2522.
Purpose: We compared the learning curve and outcomes in children undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty during the initiation of a robotic surgery program compared to the benchmark of open pyeloplasty. Materials and Methods: The records of our first consecutive 33 children undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty from 2006 to 2009 were retrospectively reviewed and compared to those of age and gender matched children who underwent open repair done by senior faculty surgeons before the initiation of our robotic surgery program. We compared operative time, complications, postoperative pain, length of stay and surgical success for 2 surgeons who adopted the robotic approach at an academic teaching institution. Results: We found no significant differences in length of stay, pain score or surgical success at a median followup of 16 months. The number of complications was similar and they tended to be early and technical in the robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty group. Overall average operative time was 90 minutes longer (38%) for robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (p <0.004). When evaluated chronologically, there was evidence of a learning curve. After 15 to 20 robotic cases overall operative times for robotic assisted laparoscopic cases was consistently within 1 SD of our average open pyeloplasty time with no significant difference in overall operative time (p = 0.23). Of the decrease in overall operative time 70% was due to decreased pyeloplasty time rather than peripheral time. Conclusions: There was similar safety and efficacy with robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty, although complications tended to be technical and early in our initial experience. Operative time decreased with experience and after 15 to 20 cases it was similar to that of open pyeloplasty with similar outcomes and surgical success. © 2011 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, INC.