Single-port Versus Multi-port Robotic-assisted Procedures From the Patient’s Perspective: A Retrospective Cohort Study

No AccessUrology PracticePatient Care1 Nov 2022Single-port Versus Multi-port Robotic-assisted Procedures From the Patient's Perspective: A Retrospective Cohort Study Luca A. Morgantini, Matthew Del Pino, Arthi Bharadwaj, Ahmad Alzein, Ashwin Ganesh, Erin Egan, Francesco Del Giudice, and Simone Crivellaro Luca A. MorgantiniLuca A. Morgantini Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Matthew Del PinoMatthew Del Pino *Correspondence: Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 820 S. Wood St. North, Suite 515, Chicago, Illinois 60612 telephone: 914-414-1871; FAX: 312-413-0495; email address: E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7678-2764 Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Arthi BharadwajArthi Bharadwaj Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Ahmad AlzeinAhmad Alzein Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Ashwin GaneshAshwin Ganesh Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Erin EganErin Egan Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois , Francesco Del GiudiceFrancesco Del Giudice Department of Urology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California , and Simone CrivellaroSimone Crivellaro Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000340AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Introduction: The da Vinci SP® single-port system, differently from prior platforms, utilizes a single 2.5 cm incision to accommodate 1 flexible camera and 3 articulated robotic arms. Potential advantages include shorter hospitalization, improved cosmesis, and reduced postoperative pain. This project investigates the impact of the novel single-port system on cosmetic and psychometric patient assessment. Methods: The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (a validated patient-reported outcomes measure for surgical scar) has been administered retrospectively to patients who underwent either an SP or Xi® urological procedure at a single center. Four domains were assessed: Appearance, Consciousness, Satisfaction With Appearance, and Satisfaction With Symptoms. Higher scores represent worse reported outcomes. Results: Compared to 78 Xi procedure recipients (mean 15.28), 104 SP procedure recipients (mean 13.84) reported significantly better cosmetic scar appearance U(NSP=104, NMP=78) = 3,739 (P = .007) where U is the difference between the 2 rank totals, and NSP and NMP represent the number of single-port and multi-port procedure recipient respondents, respectively. Similarly, the SP cohort (mean 8.80) compared to the Xi group (mean 9.87) demonstrated significantly better consciousness of their surgical scar, U(NSP=104, NMP=78) = 3,329 (P = .045), and higher satisfaction with the cosmetic appearance of their surgical scar, U(NSP=103, NMP=78) = 3,232 (P = .022), with the SP group (mean 11.35) attaining better scores than the Xi group (mean 12.54). No significant difference was found for "Satisfaction With Symptoms," U(NSP=103, NMP=78) = 3,969 (P = .88), despite the SP group (mean 6.58) attaining lower scores than the Xi group (mean 6.74). Conclusions: This study demonstrates patients' favorable perception of SP versus XI surgery in terms of aesthetic outcomes. An ongoing study is investigating the relationship between cosmetic satisfaction and length of stay, postoperative pain, and narcotic use. References 1. A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery: first clinical investigation. Eur Urol. 2014; 66(6):1033-1043. Google Scholar 2. Robotic-assisted single-port donor nephrectomy using the da Vinci single-site platform. J Surg Res. 2018; 222:34-38. Google Scholar 3. . Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) with daVinci Single-Site® platform. Concept and evolution of the technique following an IDEAL phase 1. J Robot Surg. 2019; 13(2):215-226. Google Scholar 4. . Technical considerations of single port ureteroneocystostomy utilizing da Vinci SP platform. Urology. 2019; 129:236. Google Scholar 5. Initial experience with da Vinci single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomies. Eur Urol. 2020; 77(3):373-379. Google Scholar 6. . Single-site robotic platform in clinical practice: first cases in the USA. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2019; 71(3):294-298. Google Scholar 7. . Novel system for robotic single-port surgery: feasibility and state of the art in urology. Eur Urol Focus. 2018; 4(5):669-673. Google Scholar 8. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1076 cases. Eur Urol. 2011; 60(5):998-1005. Google Scholar 9. . Robot-assisted surgery for benign distal ureteral strictures: step-by-step technique using the SP® surgical system. BJU Int. 2019; 123(4):733-739. Google Scholar 10. . Single-port robotic intracorporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion during radical cystectomy using the SP surgical system: step-by-step technique. Urology. 2019; 130:196-200. Google Scholar 11. . Single-port robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience and technique with the da Vinci® SP platform. BJU Int. 2019; 124(6):1022-1027. Google Scholar 12. . The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire: a reliable and valid patient-reported outcomes measure for linear scars. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 123(5):1481-1489. Google Scholar 13. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004; 113(7):1960-1965. Google Scholar 14. A comparative analysis of surgical scar cosmesis based on operative approach for radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2021; 35(2):138-143. Google Scholar 15. . Comparison of face-to-face interview and telephone interview administration of COPD assessment test: a randomized study. Qual Life Res. 2014; 23(4):1193-1197. Google Scholar 16. . Single-port urological surgery: single-center experience with the first 100 cases. Urology. 2009; 74(4):801-804. Google Scholar Submitted March 7, 2022; accepted July 11, 2022; published October 19, 2022. Recusal: Urology Practice® Section Editor Dr. Skinner was recused from review of this article due to affiliation with Stanford University. Support: None. Conflict of Interest: SC: Intuitive. All other Authors have nothing to disclose. Ethics Statement: This study received Institutional Review Board approval (protocol No. 2020-0869). © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 9Issue 6November 2022Page: 575-579 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsrobotic surgical procedurespatient reported outcome measurescicatrixurologic neoplasmspsychometricsMetricsAuthor Information Luca A. Morgantini Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Matthew Del Pino Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois *Correspondence: Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 820 S. Wood St. North, Suite 515, Chicago, Illinois 60612 telephone: 914-414-1871; FAX: 312-413-0495; email address: E-mail Address: [email protected] More articles by this author Arthi Bharadwaj Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Ahmad Alzein Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Ashwin Ganesh Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Erin Egan Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Francesco Del Giudice Department of Urology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California More articles by this author Simone Crivellaro Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois More articles by this author Expand All Submitted March 7, 2022; accepted July 11, 2022; published October 19, 2022. Recusal: Urology Practice® Section Editor Dr. Skinner was recused from review of this article due to affiliation with Stanford University. Support: None. Conflict of Interest: SC: Intuitive. All other Authors have nothing to disclose. Ethics Statement: This study received Institutional Review Board approval (protocol No. 2020-0869). Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...