Feasibility and Safety of Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Short-Term Outcomes of a Pilot Study with da Vinci Xi Platform During COVID-19.

Background: Colorectal cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the world. Approximately, one of three diagnosed colorectal cancers is a rectal cancer. Recent developments in the field of rectal surgery have promoted the use of surgical robots, which are of great need when surgeons face anatomical difficulties, such as a narrowed male pelvis, bulky tumor, or obese patients. This study aims to evaluate the clinical results of robotic rectal cancer surgery during the introduction period of a surgical robot system. Moreover, the period of the introduction of this technique coincided with the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Since December 2019, the Surgery Department of the University Hospital of Varna has become the newest and the most modern Robotic Surgery Center of Competence in Bulgaria, equipped with the most advanced da Vinci Xi surgical system. From January 2020 to October 2020 a total number of 43 patients have underwent surgical treatment, of which 21 had roboticassisted procedures and the rest - open procedures. Results: Patient characteristics were close between the studied groups. The mean patient age in robotic surgery was 65 years, as six of these patients were females, while in case of open surgery these values were to 70 and 6, respectively. Two thirds (66.7%) of the patients operated on with da Vinci Xi were with tumor stage 3 or 4 and approximately 10% had the tumor located in the lower part of the rectum. The median value of the operation time was 210 min, while the length of hospital stay was 7 days. These short-term parameters were not found to have a large difference in respect to the open surgery group. A significant difference is depicted for the number of lymph nodes resected and the blood loss, with both parameters demonstrating advantage for the robot-assisted surgery. The blood loss is more than twice less than the case of open surgery. Conclusions: The results confidently showed the successful introduction of the robot-assisted platform in the surgery department despite the limitations caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This technique is expected to become the main choice of minimally invasive technique applied to all types of colorectal cancer surgery in the Robotic Surgery Center of Competence.

Same day discharge for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective cohort study documenting an Australian approach.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of robotic surgical systems has significantly impacted urological surgery, arguably more so than other surgical disciplines. The focus of our study was length of hospital stay - patients have traditionally been discharged day 1 post-robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), however, during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and consequential resource limitations, our centre has facilitated a cohort of same-day discharges with initial success. METHODS: We conducted a prospective tertiary single-centre cohort study of a series of all patients (n = 28) - undergoing RARP between January and April 2021. All patients were considered for a day zero discharge pathway which consisted of strict inclusion criteria. At follow-up, each patient's perspective on their experience was assessed using a validated post-operative satisfaction questionnaire. Data were reviewed retrospectively for all those undergoing RARP over the study period, with day zero patients compared to overnight patients. RESULTS: Overall, 28 patients 20 (71%) fulfilled the objective criteria for day zero discharge. Eleven patients (55%) agreed pre-operatively to day zero discharge and all were successfully discharged on the same day as their procedure. There was no statistically significant difference in age, BMI, ASA, Charlson score or disease volume. All patients indicated a high level of satisfaction with their procedure. Median time from completion of surgery to discharge was 426 min (7.1 h) in the day zero discharge cohort. CONCLUSION: Day zero discharge for RARP appears to deliver high satisfaction, oncological and safety outcomes. Therefore, our study demonstrates early success with unsupported same-day discharge in carefully selected and pre-counselled patients.

Safety and Feasibility of Telehealth Only Preoperative Evaluation Before Minimally Invasive Robotic Urologic Surgery.

Purpose: Telehealth utilization has increased dramatically over the past few years due to improvement in technology and the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, no study has examined whether a telehealth visit alone for preoperative evaluation is safe and sufficient before surgery. We examined the safety and feasibility of preoperative telehealth visits alone before minimally invasive urologic surgery. Materials and Methods: Single institution retrospective review of robotic prostate, kidney, and cystectomy procedures between April and December 2020. Cases were dichotomized into those who underwent preoperative evaluation by telehealth only vs traditional in-person visits. Outcomes included complications, blood loss, conversion to open surgery rates, and operative times. We assessed efficiency of care by measuring time from preoperative visit to surgery. Results: Three hundred fourteen patients were included in the study, with 14% of cases (n = 45) being performed after a preoperative telehealth visit. The majority of cases included in analysis were robotic surgeries of the prostate (56.1% of all cases, n = 176) and the kidney (35.0% of all cases, n = 110). Patients seen via telehealth alone preoperatively had no significant differences in any grade of complications, perioperative outcomes, blood loss, operative time, and length of stay. There was no difference in change in anticipated procedure between the groups, and there was no case of conversion to open surgery in the telehealth only group. Time from preoperative visit to surgery was significantly shorter for the telehealth group by 13 days. Conclusions: Our study is the first to analyze the safety of telehealth only preoperative visits before minimally invasive urologic surgery. We found no difference in perioperative outcomes including conversion to open surgery or change in planned procedure. Furthermore, telehealth preoperative visits appeared to facilitate shorter time to surgery. This study has important implications for expediting patient care and medicolegal considerations.

Same-Day Discharge Protocol for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Experience of a High-Volume Referral Center.

Objective: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic continues, there is increased value in performing same-day discharge (SDD) protocols to minimize viral exposure and maintain the appropriate surgical treatment for oncologic patients. In this scenario, we performed a prospective analysis of outcomes of our patients undergoing SDD protocol after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Materials and Methods: The SDD criteria included patients with no intraoperative complications, stable postoperative hemoglobin levels (compared with preoperative values), stable vital signs, normal urine output, ambulation with assistance and independently without dizziness, tolerance of clear liquids without nausea or vomiting, pain control with oral medication, and patient/family confidence with SDD. Patients older than 70 years, concomitant general surgery operations, multiple comorbidities, and complex procedures such as salvage surgery were excluded from our protocol. Results: Of the 101 patients who met the criteria for SDD, 73 (72%) had an effective SDD. All SDF (same day discharge failure) patients were discharged one day after surgery. Intraoperative characteristics were not statistically different with a median operative time of 92 (81-107) vs 103 (91-111) minutes for SDD and SDF, respectively. Of the 28 SDF patients, the most common reasons for staying were anesthesia-related factors of nausea (35%), drowsiness (7%), patient/caregiver preference (25%), pain (14%), labile blood pressure (7%), arrhythmia (7%), and dizziness (7%). There was no significant difference in readmission rates, complication rates, or postoperative pain scores between SDD and SDF patients. Conclusions: In our experience, SDD for patients undergoing RARP can be safely and feasibly incorporated into a clinical care pathway without increasing readmission rates. We were effective in 72% of cases because of coordinated care between anesthetics, nursing staff, and appropriate patient selection. We also believe that incorporating pre- and postoperative patient education and assurance is crucial to minimize their exposure to COVID-19 during the surgical treatment for prostate cancer.

Perspectives of Gynecologic Oncologists on Minimally Invasive Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Turkish Society of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Oncology (MIJOD) Survey.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate gynecologic oncologists' trends and attitudes towards the use of Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in active period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. METHODS: Online national survey sent to members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform consisting of six sections and 45 questions between the dates 1-15 June 2020 in Turkey to explore their surgical practice during the pandemic in three hospital types: Education and research hospital/university hospital, state hospital and private Hospital. Participants were gynecologic oncologists who are members of Turkish Endoscopy Platform. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of participants canceled all operations except for cancer surgeries and emergent operations. About a quarter of participants (28%) continued to operate laparoscopically and/or robotically. For the evaluation of the suspected adnexial mass (SAM) 64% used laparotomy and only 13 % operated by laparoscopy (L/S). For the management of low-risk early-stage endometrial cancer only fifth of the participants preferred to perform L/S. For endometrial cancer with high-intermediate risk factors more than half of participants preferred complete staging with laparotomy. For advanced stage ovarian cancer, one-fifth of the participants preferred to perform an explorative laparotomy, whilst 15 % preferred diagnostic laparoscopy to triage the patients for either NACT or cytoreductive surgery. On the contrary 41 % of participants chose to have cytology by paracentesis for neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Gynecologic oncologists with >10 years L/S experience used MIS more for SAM. Furthermore, experienced surgeons used L/S more for endometrial cancer patients. In busy COVID hospitals, more participants preferred laparotomy over L/S. CONCLUSION: Use of MIS decreased during the pandemic in Turkey. More experienced surgeons continued to perform MIS. Surgical treatment was the preferred approach for SAM, early-stage endometrial cancer.  However, NACT was more popular compared to radical surgery.

Virtual postoperative visits following robotic gynecologic surgery: a study of patient satisfaction, safety, and feasibility.

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic the use of telehealth has burgeoned. Numerous surgical specialties have already adopted the use of virtual postoperative visits, but there is data lacking in both robotics and gynecology. In this single-institution prospective cohort study we sought to evaluate the patient satisfaction, feasibility and safety of postoperative telehealth visits following robotic gynecologic surgery. Thirty-three patients undergoing robotic gynecologic procedures participated in a postoperative telehealth visit approximately 2 weeks following surgery, of which 27 completed a survey which assessed participant satisfaction with the telehealth visit, overall health-related quality of life following surgery, exposure to telehealth visits, and social determinants of health. The mean satisfaction score was just below 'excellent'. Only 2 participants (6.3%) required an in-person visit. Postoperative telehealth visit satisfaction score was significantly associated only with BMI (Pearson r = 0.45, p = 0.018). These data suggest that telehealth visits following robotic gynecologic procedures appear to be safe and feasible, and are associated with a high level of patient satisfaction.

The impact of COVID-19 on surgical volume and surgical training at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed most health services. As a result, many surgeries have been deferred and diagnoses delayed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of clinical activity from 2017 to 2020. We compared caseload for index procedures 2017-2019 (period 1) versus 2020 (period 2) to see the effect of the COVID pandemic. We then compared the activity during the first lockdown (March 23rd) to the rest of the year when we increased our theatre access by utilising a 'clean' site. RESULTS: The average annual number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed during period 1 was 82 and 352 respectively. This reduced to 68 (17.1% reduction) and 262 (25.6% reduction) during period 2. The number of patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy decreased from 308 to 243 (21% reduction). The number of prostate biopsies decreased from 420 to 234 (44.3% reduction). The number of radical orchidectomies decreased from 18 to 11 (39% reduction). The mean number of RARC and RARP per month during period 2 was 5.5 and 22. This decreased to 4 and 9 per month during the first national lockdown but was maintained thereafter despite two further lockdowns. CONCLUSION: There has been a substantial decrease in urological oncology caseload during the COVID pandemic. The use of alternate pathways such as 'clean' sites can ensure continuity of care for cancer surgery and training needs.

Evaluating the ability of students to learn and utilize a novel telepresence platform, Proximie.

Novice users of telesurgery could be limited by their experience and technical ability. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care systems is unprecedented, and telehealth allowed care providers and patients a safety margin. An indirect impact of redeployment of hospital staff during COVID-19 management has been on the reduced educational opportunities for residents. Proximie can be considered as a virtual teaching platform or classroom for any user. Twenty-one students voluntarily participated in utilizing a da Vinci® skills simulator (dVSS) to carry out surgical training simulation tasks. Our study focuses on digital native's adaptation to utilizing Proximie's augmented reality platform to direct task performance, to gauge its feasibility by this unique cohort.

Robotic Colostomy Takedown in a Patient with Extensive Ventral Hernias and Adhesive Disease.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate a surgical video wherein a robot-assisted colostomy takedown was performed with anastomosis of the descending colon to the rectum after reduction of ventral hernias and extensive lysis of adhesions. DESIGN: Case report and a step-by-step video demonstration of a robot-assisted colostomy takedown and end-to-side anastomosis. SETTING: Tertiary referral center in New Haven, Connecticut. A 64-year-old female was diagnosed with stage IIIA endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma in 2015 when she underwent an optimal cytoreductive surgery. In addition, she required resection of the sigmoid colon and a descending end colostomy with Hartmann's pouch, mainly secondary to extensive diverticulitis. After adjuvant chemoradiation, she remained disease free and desired colostomy reversal. Body mass index at the time was 32 kg/m2. Computed tomography of her abdomen and pelvis did not show any evidence of recurrence but was notable for a large ventral hernia and a parastomal hernia. She then underwent a colonoscopy, which was negative for any pathologic condition, except for some narrowing of the distal rectum above the level of the levator ani. INTERVENTIONS: Enterolysis was extensive and took approximately 2 hours. The splenic flexure of the colon had to be mobilized to provide an adequate proximal limb to the anastomosis site. An anvil was then introduced into the distal descending colon through the colostomy site. A robotic stapler was used to seal the colostomy site and detach it from the anterior abdominal wall. Unfortunately, the 28-mm EEA sizer (Covidien, Dublin, Ireland) perforated through the distal rectum, caudal to the stricture site. A substantial length of the distal rectum had to be sacrificed secondary to the perforation, which mandated further mobilization of the splenic flexure. The rectum was then reapproximated with a 3-0 barbed suture in 2 layers. This provided us with approximately 6- to 8-cm distal rectum. An end-to-side anastomosis of the descending colon to the distal rectum was performed. Anastomotic integrity was confirmed using the bubble test. Because of the lower colorectal anastomosis, a protective diverting loop ileostomy was performed. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course. A hypaque enema performed 3 months after the colostomy takedown showed no evidence of anastomotic leak or stricture. The ileostomy was then reversed without any complications. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted colostomy takedown and anastomosis of the descending colon to rectum were successfully performed. Although there is a paucity of literature examining this technique within gynecologic surgery, the literature on general surgery has supported laparoscopic Hartmann's reversal and has demonstrated improved rates of postoperative complications and incisional hernia and reduced duration of hospitalization [1]. Minimally invasive technique is a feasible alternative to laparotomy for gynecologic oncology patients who undergo colostomy, as long as the patients are recurrence free.

Surgical treatment of gastrointestinal tumors in a COVID-19 pandemic hospital: Can open versus minimally invasive surgery be safely performed?

PURPOSE: In order for patients with gastrointestinal cancer not to suffer the consequences of delayed treatment, they should be operated on in pandemic hospitals under adequate conditions. We aimed to discuss the outcomes of our gastrointestinal cancer surgery patients and to present our patient management recommendations to resume operative treatment during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic while taking into account hospital facilities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 129 gastrointestinal cancer patients who underwent surgery between March 2020 and May 2021 in the gastrointestinal surgery clinic of our hospital, which was assigned as a pandemic hospital in March 2020. Patients' demographic characteristics and preoperative and postoperative findings were recorded. RESULTS: Among the patients, 42.6% (n = 55) were female and 57.3% (n = 74) were male. The mean age was 61.89 ± 3.4 years. The primary tumor organs were the stomach 37.2% (n = 48), pancreas 36.4% (n = 47), rectum 11.6% (n = 15), colon 8.5% (n = 11), and esophagus 6.2% (n = 8). The patients were treated with open (75.2%, n = 97) or minimally invasive surgery (24.8%, n = 32; laparoscopic 11.6%, n = 15; robotic 13.2%, n = 17). Eight patients tested positive for COVID-19 before surgery. No patients developed COVID-19 during postoperative intensive care or after being moved to the floor unit. There was no COVID-19-related morbidity or mortality. CONCLUSION: Failure to treat gastrointestinal cancer patients during the pandemic may result in undesirable consequences, such as stage shift and mortality. Cancer patients can be treated safely with conventional and minimally invasive surgery guided by current recommendations and experience.

Surgeon satisfaction and outcomes of tele-proctoring for robotic gynecologic surgery.

Surgical proctoring requires increasing resources in growing healthcare systems. In addition, travel has become less safe in the era of COVID-19. This study demonstrates surgeon satisfaction and safety with tele-proctoring in robotic gynecologic surgery. This pilot study assesses surgeon satisfaction and operative outcomes with a novel operative tele-proctoring system with a continuous two-way video-audio feed that allows the off-site surgeon to see the operating room, surgical field, and hands of the robotic surgeon. After thorough system testing, two experienced surgeons underwent tele-proctoring for hospital credentialing, completing 7 total cases. Each completed pre- and post-surveys developed from the Michigan Standard Simulation Experience Scale. Surgical characteristics were compared between tele-proctored cases and 59 historical cases proctored in-person over the last 8 years. Surgeons reported unanimous high satisfaction with tele-proctoring (5 ± 0). There were no major technologic issues. Five of the tele-proctored cases and 35 of controls were hysterectomies. Mean age was 48.2 ± 1.4 years, mean BMI was 29.6 ± 0.9 kg/m2, and mean uterine weight was 152 ± 112.3 g. Two-thirds had prior abdominal surgery (P > 0.1). Tele-proctored hysterectomies were 58 ± 6.5 min shorter than controls (P = 0.001). There were no differences in EBL or complication rates (P > 0.1). Tele-proctoring resulted in high surgeon satisfaction rates with no difference in EBL or complications. Tele-mentoring is a natural extension of tele-proctoring that could provide advanced surgical expertise far beyond where we can physically reach.

Abdominal Organ Transplantation: Noteworthy Literature in 2020.

In 2020, we identified and screened over 490 peer-reviewed publications on pancreatic transplantation, over 500 on intestinal transplantation, and over 5000 on kidney transplantation. The liver transplantation section specially focused on clinical trials and systematic reviews published in 2020 and featured selected articles. This review highlights noteworthy literature pertinent to anesthesiologists and critical care physicians caring for patients undergoing abdominal organ transplantation. We explore a wide range of topics, including COVID-19 and organ transplantation, risk factors and outcomes, pain management, artificial intelligence, robotic donor surgery, and machine perfusion.

Experiences of a "COVID protected" robotic surgical centre for colorectal and urological cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic led to the cancellation of elective surgery across the United Kingdom. Re-establishing elective surgery in a manner that ensures patient and staff safety has been a priority. We report our experience and patient outcomes from setting up a "COVID protected" robotic unit for colorectal and renal surgery that housed both the da Vinci Si (Intuitive, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and the Versius (CMR Surgical, Cambridge, UK) robotic systems. "COVID protected" robotic surgery was undertaken in a day-surgical unit attached to the main hospital. A standard operating procedure was developed in collaboration with the trust COVID-19 leadership team and adapted to national recommendations. 60 patients underwent elective robotic surgery in the initial 10-weeks of the study. This included 10 colorectal procedures and 50 urology procedures. Median length of stay was 4 days for rectal cancer procedures, 2 days less than prior to the COVID period, and 1 day for renal procedures. There were no instances of in-patient coronavirus transmission. Six rectal cancer patients waited more than 62 days for their surgery because of the initial COVID peak but none had an increase T-stage between pre-operative staging and post-operative histology. Robotic surgery can be undertaken in "COVID protected" units within acute hospitals in a safe way that mitigates the increased risk of undergoing major surgery in the current pandemic. Some benefits were seen such as reduced length of stay for colorectal patients that may be associated with having a dedicated unit for elective robotic surgical services.

Novel approach to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission during trans-oral robotic surgery.

This study describes a novel approach in the reduction of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during trans-oral robotic surgery (TORS). Eight patients underwent TORS between 01 February 2020 and 07 September 2020. A sterile plastic sheet draped over sterile supports with water-tight seal around each cannula was used to create a sterile working space within which the robotic arms could freely move during operation. This set-up acts as an additional physical barrier against droplet and aerosol transmission. Operative diagnosis; droplet count and distribution on plastic sheet and face shields of console and assistant surgeons, and scrub nurse were documented. TORS tumour excision was performed for patients with suspected tonsillar tumour (n = 3) and tongue base tumour (n = 2). TORS tonsillectomy and tongue base mucosectomy was performed for cervical nodal metastatic carcinoma of unknown origin (n = 3). Droplet contamination was noted on all plastic drapes (n = 8). Droplet contamination was most severe over the central surface at 97.2% (91.7-100.0%), with the highest droplet count along the centre-most column where it overlies the site of operation in the oral cavity 33.3% (n = 31). Droplet count decreased towards the periphery. Contamination rate was 2.8% (0.0-8.3%) over the right lateral surface. There was no droplet contamination over the vertex and left lateral surface of plastic drapes. No droplet contamination was noted on face shields of all parties. The use of sterile plastic drapes with water-tight seal around each robotic cannula can help reduce viral transmission to healthcare providers during TORS.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncological and functional robotic-assisted surgical procedures.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a decrease in surgical activity to avoid nosocomial contamination. Robotic-assisted surgery safety is uncertain, since viral dissemination could be facilitated by gas environment. We assessed the impact and safety of the COVID-19 pandemic on robotic-assisted surgery. Data were collected prospectively during lockdown (March 16th-April 30th 2020) in 10 academic centres with robotic surgical activity and was compared to a reference period of similar length. After surgery, patients with suspected COVID-19 were tested by RT-PCR. During the COVID-19 lockdown we evidenced a 60% decrease in activity and a 49% decrease in oncological procedures. However, the overall proportion of oncological surgeries was significantly higher during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Thirteen (7.2%) patients had suspected COVID-19 contamination, but only three (1.6%) were confirmed by RT-PCR. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant decrease in robotic-assisted surgery. Robotic approach was safe with a low rate of postoperative COVID-19 contamination.

Minimizing Contagion Risks of COVID-19 During Transoral Robotic Surgery.

In this communication, we would like to share our experience in managing TORS patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Laryngoscope, 130:2593-2594, 2020.

Laparoscopic and Robotic Urology Surgery during Global Pandemic COVID19.

Known laparoscopic and robotic assisted approaches and techniques for the surgical management of urological malignant and benign diseases are commonly used around the World. During the global pandemic COVID19, urology surgeons had to reorganize their daily surgical practice. A concern with the use of minimally invasive techniques arose due to a proposed risk of viral transmission of the coronavirus disease with the creation of pneumoperitoneum. Due to this, we reviewed the literature to evaluate the use of laparoscopy and robotics during the pandemic COVID19. A literature review of viral transmission in surgery and of the available literature regarding the transmission of the COVID19 virus was performed up to April 30, 2020. We additionally reviewed surgical society guidelines and recommendations regarding surgery during this pandemic. Few studies have been performed on viral transmission during surgery. No study has been made regarding this area during minimally invasive urology cases. To date there is no study that demonstrates or can suggest the ability for a virus to be transmitted during surgical treatment whether open, laparoscopic or robotic. There is no society consensus on restricting laparoscopic or robotic surgery. However, there is expert consensus on modification of standard practices to minimize any risk of transmission. During the pandemic COVID19 we recommend the use of specific personal protective equipment for the surgeon, anesthesiologist and nursing staff in the operating room. Modifications of standard practices during minimally invasive surgery such as using lowest intra-abdominal pressures possible, controlled smoke evacuation systems, and minimizing energy device usage are recommended.

Postoperative assessment of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 after robotic surgical procedures during the pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To assess potential nosocomial coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) transmission in patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures during the pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective study in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopy in urology or gynaecology within 2 academic hospitals. Patients underwent local preoperative COVID-19 screening using a symptoms questionnaire. Patients with suspicious screening underwent coronavirus real time-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and were excluded from robotic surgery if positive. Patients with symptoms postsurgery were systematically tested for coronavirus by RT-PCR. One-month postsurgery, all patients had a telephone consultation to evaluate COVID-19 symptoms. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients underwent robotic surgery during the study period (median age: 63-years [IQR: 53-70], 1.8 male: female ratio). Oncology was the main indication for robotic surgery (n = 62, 91.2%) and 26 patients (38.2%) received a chest CT-scan prior to surgery. Eleven patients (16.2%) were symptomatic after surgery of whom only 1 tested positive for coronavirus by RT-PCR (1.5%) and was transferred to COVID-19 unit with no life-threatening condition. No attending surgeon was diagnosed with COVID-19 during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery seemed safe in the era of COVID-19 as long as all recommended precautions are followed. The rate of nosocomial COVID-19 transmission was extremely low despite the fact that we only used RT-PCR testing in symptomatic patients during the preoperative work-up. Larger cohort is needed to validate these results.

Robotic surgery during the COVID pandemic: why now and why for the future.

Health care has changed in unprecedented ways since the first reported cases of COVID-19. With global case rates continuing to rise and government restrictions beginning to loosen, many worry that a second wave in our future. In many hospitals around the world, non-emergent surgeries were put on hold as hospitals were transformed into COVID centers. As surgeons and administrators do their best to reinstate non-emergent procedures, guidance is sought from any and all reliable sources. Robotic surgery has many known and demonstrated benefits over open surgery and often over conventional laparoscopy. In this commentary, we aim to highlight some of the advantages robotic surgery may offer during this uniquely challenging time in health care.