First Canadian experience with robotic single-incision pyeloplasty: Comparison with multi-incision technique

Authors

  • Jeffrey Law
  • Neal Rowe
  • Jason Archambault
  • Sofia Nastis
  • Alp Sener
  • Patrick P. Luke lhsc

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3440

Abstract

Introduction: We compared the outcomes of single-incision, robotassisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty vs. multiple-incision pyeloplasty using the da Vinci robotic system.

Methods: We reviewed all consecutive robotic pyeloplasties by a single surgeon from January 2011 to August 2015. A total of 30 procedures were performed (16 single:14 multi-port). Two different single-port devices were compared: the GelPort (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA) and the Intuitive single-site access port (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA).

Results: Patient demographics were similar between the two groups. Mean operating time was similar among the single and multi-port groups (225.2 min vs. 198.9 minutes [p=0.33]). There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay in either group (86.2 hr vs. 93.2 hr [p=0.76]). There was no difference in success rates or postoperative complications among groups.

Conclusions: Single-port robotic pyeloplasty is non-inferior to multiple-incision robotic surgery in terms of operative times, hospitalization time, success rates, and complications. Verifying these results with larger cohorts is required prior to the wide adoption of this technique. Ongoing objective measurements of cosmesis and patient satisfaction are being evaluated.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Patrick P. Luke, lhsc

Professor of Surgery

Urology

Downloads

Published

2016-04-18

How to Cite

Law, J., Rowe, N., Archambault, J., Nastis, S., Sener, A., & Luke, P. P. (2016). First Canadian experience with robotic single-incision pyeloplasty: Comparison with multi-incision technique. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 10(3-4), 83–8. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3440

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 3-4 (2016): CUAJ April

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.