Summary of ‘Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robot‑assisted radical prostatectomy among the da Vinci, hinotori, and Hugo robot‑assisted surgery systems’
In the study titled “Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy among the da Vinci, hinotori, and Hugo robot-assisted surgery systems,” the authors aimed to evaluate and compare the perioperative outcomes associated with three different robotic surgical systems: the da Vinci surgical system (DVSS), hinotori surgical robot system (HSRS), and Hugo robot-assisted surgery system (HRASS). This investigation was motivated by the growing adoption of innovative surgical robotics in urology and the need for comprehensive comparative data.
Methodology
The study conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical records from 149 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) between 2022 and 2024. The cohort was divided based on the robotic system used: DVSS (n = 81), HSRS (n = 52), and HRASS (n = 16). Researchers compared various patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes, including complications, console time, and time to console start, which refers to the duration from port placement to the start of console surgery.
Statistical analyses included the Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. A linear model was utilized to assess learning rates for the different systems.
Key Findings
The results revealed significant differences in several operational metrics among the robotic systems. Notably, the median total operative time was longest for the DVSS at 348 minutes, followed closely by HSRS at 343 minutes, while the HRASS had a substantially shorter median time of 279 minutes (p < 0.001). The time to console start also varied, with the DVSS performing significantly better than the HSRS and HRASS (p = 0.024). However, the median port placement time among the groups showed no significant differences.
Despite the differences in operational efficiency, the incidence of perioperative complications was consistent across all three robotic systems, showing no statistically significant variations, indicating that RARP can be safely performed using any of these robotic platforms.
Discussion and Implications
The study of perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, highlights the advancements in robotic technology and its implications in surgical practices for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The authors noted that the DVSS demonstrated superior efficiency in docking and transitioning to console surgery compared to the other systems. However, the findings also indicate that the HSRS and HRASS can be effectively utilized, emphasizing the importance of training and experience in minimizing operational times.
Moreover, the study underlines the necessity for ongoing evaluation and improvement of robotic systems. As surgical robots evolve, the authors anticipate enhancements in features such as docking efficiency, instrument variety, and usability, which could further streamline surgical procedures and improve patient outcomes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this comprehensive analysis about the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, provides valuable insights into the comparative effectiveness of three robotic systems used for RARP. While the DVSS exhibited shorter docking and console times, all systems demonstrated similar safety profiles regarding perioperative complications. The study advocates for the continued use of diverse robotic systems in clinical practice, alongside rigorous training for surgical teams, to ensure the highest standards of patient care in robotic-assisted surgeries.
Through this work, the authors contribute to the growing body of literature on robotic surgery, paving the way for future research and the refinement of surgical techniques in urology.
READ MORE… https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11701-025-02215-6
