The growth of computer-assisted (robotic) surgery in urology 2000-2014: The role of Asian surgeons

Asian Journal of Urology, 2015, 2 (1): 1-10 doi:

Asian Focus

The growth of computer-assisted (robotic) surgery in urology 2000-2014: The role of Asian surgeons

Deepansh Dalela¹, Rajesh Ahlawat², Akshay Sood¹, Wooju Jeong¹, Mahendra Bhandari¹, Mani Menon¹

1. Henry Ford Health System-Vattikuti Urology Institute, Detroit, MI, USA;
2. Medanta Hospitals-Medanta Vattikuti Urology Institute, Gurgaon, Haryana, India

Abstract
Related Citation (15)

Download:

HTML

PDF (647KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective: A major role in the establishment of computer-assisted robotic surgery (CARS) can be traced to the work of Mani Menon at Vattikuti Urology Institute (VUI), and of many surgeons of Asian origin. The success of robotic surgery in urology has spurred its acceptance in other surgical disciplines, improving patient comfort and disease outcomes and helping the industrial growth. The present paper gives an overview of the progress and development of robotic surgery, especially in the field of Urology; and to underscore some of the seminal work done by the VUI and Asian surgeons in the development of robotic surgery in urology in the US and around the world. Methods: PubMed/Medline and Scopus databases were searched for publications from 2000 through June 2014, using algorithms based on keywords "robotic surgery", "prostate", "kidney", "adrenal", "bladder", "reconstruction", and "kidney transplant". Inclusion criteria used were published full articles, book chapters, clinical trials, prospective and retrospective series, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses written in English language. Studies from Asian institutions or with the first/senior author of Asian origin were included for discussion, and focused on techniques of robotic surgery, relevant patient outcomes and associated demographic trends. Results: A total of 58 articles selected for final review highlight the important strides made by robots in urology, from robotic radical prostatectomy in 2000 to robotic kidney transplant in 2014. In the hands of an experienced robotic surgeon, it has been demonstrated to improve functional patient outcomes and minimize perioperative complications compared to open surgery, especially in urologic oncology and reconstructive urology. With increasing surgeon proficiency, the benefits of robotic surgery were consistently seen across different surgical disciplines, patient populations, and strata. Conclusion: The addition of robot to the surgical armamentarium has allowed better patient care and improved disease outcomes. VUI and surgeons of Asian origin have played a pioneering role in dissemination of computer-assisted surgery.

Key words： Asian IDEAL Kidney transplant Nephrectomy Radical cystectomy Radical prostatectomy Reconstructive urology Robotic surgery

Received: 01 August 2014 Published: 06 February 2015

Corresponding Authors: Deepansh Dalela E-mail: ddalela1@hfhs.org

	Service
	E-mail this article
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	Articles by authors
	Deepansh Dalela
	Rajesh Ahlawat
	Akshay Sood
	Wooju Jeong
	Mahendra Bhandari
	Mani Menon

TRENDMD:

Cite this article:

Deepansh Dalela,Rajesh Ahlawat,Akshay Sood, et al. The growth of computer-assisted (robotic) surgery in urology 2000-2014: The role of Asian surgeons[J]. Asian Journal of Urology, 2015, 2(1): 1-10.

URL:

http://www.ajurology.com/EN/ OR http://www.ajurology.com/EN/Y2015/V2/I1/1

[1]	Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Sarle R, Hemal A, Peabody JO, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002;168:945-9.
[2]	Tewari A, Peabody J, Sarle R, Balakrishnan G, Hemal A, Shrivastava A, et al. Technique of da Vinci robot-assisted anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 2002;60:569-72.
[3]	Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 2002;60:864-8.
[4]	Kiyoshima K, Yokomizo A, Yoshida T, Tomita K, Yonemasu H, Nakamura M, et al. Anatomical features of periprostatic tissue and its surroundings: a histological analysis of 79 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2004;34:463-8.
[5]	Costello AJ, Brooks M, Cole OJ. Anatomical studies of the neurovascular bundle and cavernosal nerves. BJU Int 2004; 94:1071-6.
[6]	Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal A, Savera A, Shrivastava A, Menon M. Robotic radical prostatectomy with preservation of the prostatic fascia: a feasibility study. Urology 2005;66: 1261-5.
[7]	Menon M, Kaul S, Bhandari A, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Hemal A. Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: a questionnaire based analysis of outcomes after conventional nerve sparing and prostatic fascia sparing techniques. J Urol 2005;174:2291-6.
[8]	Menon M, Shrivastava A, Bhandari M, Satyanarayana R, Siva S, Agarwal PK. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technical modifications in 2009. Eur Urol 2009;56:89-96.
[9]	Rocco B, Gregori A, Stener S, Santoro L, Bozzola A, Galli S, et al. Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal videolaparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007;51: 996-1003.
[10]	Tewari AK, Bigelow K, Rao S, Takenaka A, El-Tabi N, Te A, et al. Anatomic restoration technique of continence mechanism and preservation of puboprostatic collar: a novel modification to achieve early urinary continence in men undergoing robotic prostatectomy. Urology 2007;69:726-31.
[11]	Menon M, Muhletaler F, Campos M, Peabody JO. Assessment of early continence after reconstruction of the periprostatic tissues in patients undergoing computer assisted (robotic) prostatectomy: results of a 2 group parallel randomized controlled trial. J Urol 2008;180:1018-23.
[12]	Sammon JD, Muhletaler F, Peabody JO, Diaz-Insua M, Satyanaryana R, Menon M. Long-term functional urinary outcomes comparing single-vs double-layer urethrovesical anastomosis: two-year follow-up of a two-group parallel randomized controlled trial. Urology 2010;76:1102-7.
[13]	Kaul S, Sammon J, Bhandari A, Peabody J, Rogers CG, Menon M. A novel method of urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using a unidirectional barbed wound closure device: feasibility study and early outcomes in 51 patients. J Endourol 2010;24:1789-93.
[14]	Sammon J, Kim TK, Trinh QD, Bhandari A, Kaul S, Sukumar S, et al. Anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: randomized controlled trial comparing barbed and standard monofilament suture. Urology 2011;78:572-9.
[15]	Krane LS, Bhandari M, Peabody JO, Menon M. Impact of percutaneous suprapubic tube drainage on patient discomfort after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2009;56:325-30.
[16]	Sammon JD, Trinh QD, Sukumar S, Diaz M, Simone A, Kaul S, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous suprapubic tube drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int 2012;110:580-5.
[17]	Schumacher MC, Burkhard FC, Thalmann GN, Fleischmann A, Studer UE. Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2008;54:344-52.
[18]	Agarwal PK, Kaul S, Menon M. Development of the Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: historical perspective and technical nuances. In: Hemal A, Menon M, editors. Robotics in genitourinary surgery. 1st ed. London: Springer; 2011. p. 219-41.
[19]	Badani KK, Kaul S, Menon M. Evolution of robotic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 2766 procedures. Cancer 2007;110:1951-8.
[20]	Sukumar S, Rogers CG, Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sood A, Stricker H, et al. Oncological outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: long term follow-up in 4,803 patients. BJU Int 2014;114:824-31.
[21]	Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:418-30.
[22]	Ficarra V, Sooriakumaran P, Novara G, Schatloff O, Briganti A, Van der Poel H, et al. Systematic review of methods for reporting combined outcomes after radical prostatectomyand proposal of a novel system: the survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification. Eur Urol 2012;61:541-8.
[23]	Sooriakumaran P, Srivastava A, Shariat SF, Stricker PD, Ahlering T, Eden CG, et al. A multinational, multiinstitutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. Eur Urol 2014;66:450-6.
[24]	Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Huang MW, Robinson BD, Shevchuk MM, Durand M, et al. Anatomical grades of nerve sparing: a risk-stratified approach to neural-hammock sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int 2011;108:984-92.
[25]	Gandaglia G, Sammon JD, Chang SL, Choueiri TK, Hu JC, Karakiewicz PI, et al. Comparative effectiveness of robotassisted and open radical prostatectomy in the postdissemination era. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1419-26.
[26]	Hu JC, Gandaglia G, Karakiewicz PI, Nguyen PL, Trinh QD, Shih YC, et al. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy cancer control. Eur Urol 2014;66:666-72.
[27]	JeongW, Sood A, Ghani KR, Pucheril D, Sammon JD, Gupta NS, et al. Bimanual examination of the retrieved specimen and regional hypothermia during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a novel technique for reducing positive surgical margin and achieving pelvic cooling. BJU Int 2014;114:955-7.
[28]	Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, Shrivastava A, Shoma AM, El-Tabey NA, et al. Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int 2003;92: 232-6.
[29]	Hellenthal NJ, Hussain A, Andrews PE, Carpentier P, Castle E, Dasgupta P, et al. Surgical margin status after robot assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. J Urol 2010;184:87-91.
[30]	Novara G, Svatek RS, Karakiewicz PI, Skinner E, Ficarra V, Fradet Y, et al. Soft tissue surgical margin status is a powerful predictor of outcomes after radical cystectomy: a multicenter study of more than 4,400 patients. J Urol 2010; 183:2165-70.
[31]	Shabsigh A, Korets R, Vora KC, Brooks CM, Cronin AM, Savage C, et al. Defining early morbidity of radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer using a standardized reporting methodology. Eur Urol 2009;55:164-74.
[32]	Hayn MH, Hellenthal NJ, Hussain A, Stegemann AP, Guru KA. Defining morbidity of robot-assisted radical cystectomy using a standardized reporting methodology. Eur Urol 2011;59: 213-8.
[33]	Ng CK, Kauffman EC, Lee MM, Otto BJ, Portnoff A, Ehrlich JR, et al. A comparison of postoperative complications in open versus robotic cystectomy. Eur Urol 2010;57:274-81.
[34]	Nix J, Smith A, Kurpad R, Nielsen ME, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS. Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol 2010;57:196-201.
[35]	Shariat SF, Palapattu GS, Karakiewicz PI, Rogers CG, Vazina A, Bastian PJ, et al. Discrepancy between clinical and pathologic stage: impact on prognosis after radical cystectomy. Eur Urol 2007;51:137-51.
[36]	Bi L, Huang H, Fan X, Li K, Xu K, Jiang C, et al. Extended vs non-extended pelvic lymph node dissection and their influence on recurrence-free survival in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. BJU Int 2014;113: E39-48.
[37]	Marshall SJ, Hayn MH, Stegemann AP, Agarwal PK, Badani KK, Balbay MD, et al. Impact of surgeon and volume on extended lymphadenectomy at the time of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium (IRCC). BJU Int 2013;111:1075-80.
[38]	Davis JW, Gaston K, Anderson R, Dinney CP, Grossman HB, Munsell MF, et al. Robot assisted extended pelvic lymphadenectomy at radical cystectomy: lymph node yield compared with second look open dissection. J Urol 2011;185: 79-83.
[39]	Ahmed K, Khan SA, Hayn MH, Agarwal PK, Badani KK, Balbay MD, et al. Analysis of intracorporeal compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. Eur Urol 2014;65:340-7.
[40]	Rogers C, Laungani R, Krane LS, Bhandari A, Bhandari M, Menon M. Robotic nephrectomy for the treatment of benign and malignant disease. BJU Int 2008;102:1660-5.
[41]	Badani KK, Hemal AK, Fumo M, Kaul S, Shrivastava A, Rajendram AK, et al. Robotic extended pyelolithotomy for treatment of renal calculi: a feasibility study. World J Urol 2006;24:198-201.
[42]	Eun D, Bhandari A, Boris R, Rogers C, Bhandari M, Menon M. Concurrent upper and lower urinary tract robotic surgery: strategies for success. BJU Int 2007;100:1121-5.
[43]	Krane LS, Shrivastava A, Eun D, Narra V, Bhandari M, Menon M. A four-step technique of robotic right adrenalectomy: initial experience. BJU Int 2008;101:1289-92.
[44]	Malley D, Boris R, Kaul S, Eun D, Muhletaler F, Rogers C, et al. Synchronous bilateral adrenalectomy for adrenocorticotropic-dependent Cushing’s syndrome. JSLS 2008;12:198-201.
[45]	Gill IS, Desai MM, Kaouk JH, Meraney AM, Murphy DP, Sung GT, et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumor: duplicating open surgical techniques. J Urol 2002; 167:469-76.
[46]	Ng CS, Gill IS, Ramani AP, Steinberg AP, Spaliviero M, Abreu SC, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: patient selection and perioperative outcomes. J Urol 2005;174:846-9.
[47]	Kaul S, Laungani R, Sarle R, Stricker H, Peabody J, Littleton R, et al. da Vinci-assisted robotic partial nephrectomy: technique and results at a mean of 15 months of follow-up. Eur Urol 2007;51:186-92.
[48]	Eun D, Bhandari A, Boris R, Lyall K, Bhandari M, Menon M, et al. A novel technique for creating solid renal pseudotumors and renal vein-inferior vena caval pseudothrombus in a porcine and cadaveric model. J Urol 2008;180:1510-4.
[49]	Patel MN, Bhandari M, Menon M, Rogers CG. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: has it come of age? Indian J Urol 2009; 25:523-8.
[50]	Patel MN, Bhandari M, Menon M, Rogers CG. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 2009;103:1296-311.
[51]	Rogers CG, Laungani R, Bhandari A, Krane LS, Eun D, Patel MN, et al. Maximizing console surgeon independence during robot-assisted renal surgery by using the Fourth Arm and TilePro. J Endourol 2009;23:115-21.
[52]	Sukumar S, Petros F, Mander N, Chen R, Menon M, Rogers CG. Robotic partial nephrectomy using robotic bulldog clamps. JSLS 2011;15:520-6.
[53]	Kaczmarek BF, Sukumar S, Petros F, Trinh QD, Mander N, Chen R, et al. Robotic ultrasound probe for tumor identification in robotic partial nephrectomy: initial series and outcomes. Int J Urol 2013;20:172-6.
[54]	Patel MN, Krane LS, Bhandari A, Laungani RG, Shrivastava A, Siddiqui SA, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors larger than 4 cm. Eur Urol 2010;57:310-6.
[55]	Petros F, Sukumar S, Haber GP, Dulabon L, Bhayani S, Stifelman M, et al. Multi-institutional analysis of robotassisted partial nephrectomy for renal tumors >4 cm versus [56] Naeem N, Petros F, Sukumar S, Patel M, Bhandari A, Kaul S, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in obese patients. J Endourol 2011;25:101-5.
[57]	Sammon J, Petros F, Sukumar S, Bhandari A, Kaul S, Menon M, et al. Barbed suture for renorrhaphy during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 2011;25:529-33.
[58]	Rogers CG, Ghani KR, Kumar RK, Jeong W, Menon M. Robotic partial nephrectomy with cold ischemia and on-clamp tumor extraction: recapitulating the open approach. Eur Urol 2013; 63:573-8.
[59]	Ghani KR, Porter J, Menon M, Rogers C. Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: a step-by-step guide. BJU Int 2014;114:311-3.
[60]	Hu JC, Treat E, Filson CP, McLaren I, Xiong S, Stepanian S, et al. Technique and outcomes of robot-assisted retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter study. Eur Urol 2014;66:542-9.
[61]	Ghani KR, Sukumar S, Sammon JD, Rogers CG, Trinh QD, Menon M. Practice patterns and outcomes of open and minimally invasive partial nephrectomy since the introduction of robotic partial nephrectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. J Urol 2014;191:907-12.
[62]	Hemal AK, Mukherjee S, Singh K. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus robotic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a series of 60 cases performed by a single surgeon. Can J Urol 2010;17:5012-6.
[63]	Sukumar S, Sun M, Karakiewicz PI, Friedman AA, Chun FK, Sammon J, et al. National trends and disparities in the use of minimally invasive adult pyeloplasty. J Urol 2012;188: 913-8.
[64]	Li H, Sammon J, Roghmann F, Sood A, Ehlert M, Sun M, et al. Utilization and perioperative outcomes of robotic vaginal vault suspension compared to abdominal or vaginal approaches for pelvic organ prolapse. Can Urol Assoc J 2014;8: 100-6.
[65]	Kaul S, Elder JS. Robotic surgery of the kidney in children. In: Hemal A, Menon M, editors. Robotics in genitourinary surgery. 1st ed. London: Springer; 2011. p. 581-94.
[66]	Trevisani LF, Nguyen HT. Current controversies in pediatric urologic robotic surgery. Curr Opin Urol 2013;23:72-7.
[67]	Hoznek A, Zaki SK, Samadi DB, Salomon L, Lobontiu A, Lang P, et al. Robotic assisted kidney transplantation: an initial experience. J Urol 2002;167:1604-6.
[68]	Boggi U, Vistoli F, Signori S, D’Imporzano S, Amorese G, Consani G, et al. Robotic renal transplantation: first European case. Transpl Int 2011;24:213-8.
[69]	Tzvetanov I, Giulianotti PC, Bejarano-Pineda L, Jeon H, Garcia-Roca R, Bianco F, et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation. Surg Clin North Am 2013;93:1309-23.
[70]	Modi P, Pal B, Modi J, Singla S, Patel C, Patel R, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic living-donor nephrectomy and laparoscopic kidney transplantation: experience of initial 72 cases. Transplantation 2013;95:100-5.
[71]	Menon M, Abaza R, Sood A, Ahlawat R, Ghani KR, Jeong W, et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: evolution of a novel procedure utilizing the IDEAL guidelines (IDEAL phase 0 and 1). Eur Urol 2014;65:1001-9.
[72]	Menon M, Sood A, Bhandari M, Kher V, Ghosh P, Abaza R, 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 2014; 65:991-1000.
[73]	Oberholzer J, Giulianotti P, Danielson KK, Spaggiari M, Bejarano-Pineda L, Bianco F, et al. Minimally invasive robotic kidney transplantation for obese patients previously denied access to transplantation. Am J Transpl 2013;13:721-8.
[74]	Gala RB, Margulies R, Steinberg A, Murphy M, Lukban J, Jeppson P, et al. Systematic review of robotic surgery in gynecology: robotic techniques compared with laparoscopy and laparotomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014;21:353-61.
[75]	Toker A. Robotic thoracic surgery: from the perspectives of European chest surgeons. J Thorac Dis 2014;6:S211-6.
[76]	Ismail M, Swierzy M, Ruckert JC. State of the art of robotic thymectomy. World J Surg 2013;37:2740-6.
[77]	Kent M, Wang T, Whyte R, Curran T, Flores R, Gangadharan S. Open, video-assisted thoracic surgery, and robotic lobectomy: review of a national database. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 97:236-44.
[78]	Chauvet D, Missistrano A, Hivelin M, Carpentier A, Cornu P, Hans S. Transoral robotic-assisted skull base surgery to approach the sella turcica: cadaveric study. Neurosurg Rev 2014 [Epub ahead of print].
[79]	Chan JY, Richmon JD. Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) for benign pharyngeal lesions. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2014; 47:407-13.
[80]	Parekattil SJ, Gudeloglu A, Brahmbhatt J, Wharton J, Priola KB. Robotic assisted versus pure microsurgical vasectomy reversal: technique and prospective database control trial. J Reconstr Microsurg 2012;28:435-44.
[81]	Chan PT. The evolution and refinement of vasoepididymostomy techniques. Asian J Androl 2013;15:49-55.
[82]	Tiu A, Kim KH, Shin TY, Han WK, Han SW, Rha KH. Feasibility of robotic laparoendoscopic single-site partial nephrectomy for renal tumors >4 cm. Eur Urol 2013;63:941-6.
[83]	Kumar R, Nayak B. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a single surgeon concurrent cohort review. Indian J Urol 2013;29:19-21.
[84]	Dogra PN, Saini AK, Singh P. Robotic-assisted inguinal lymph node dissection: a preliminary report. Indian J Urol 2011;27: 424-7.
[85]	Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg CP, Muthu V, Ganpule A, Sabnis RB, et al. Preliminary safety and efficacy results with robotic high-intensity focused ultrasound: a single center Indian experience. Indian J Urol 2011;27:331-6.
[86]	McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC, et al. No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 2009;374:1105-12.
[87]	Sood A, Ghani KR, Ahlawat R, Modi P, Abaza R, Jeong W, 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 2014;66:371-8.