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 of uro-oncology practice and robot-assisted surgery during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic: A report from India.

Aim: The pandemic by novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the biggest threat to global health care. Routine care of cancer patients is affected the most. Our institute, situated in Mumbai, declared as the hotspot of COVID-19 in India, continued to cater to the needs of cancer patients. We did an observational study to review the experience of managing uro-oncology patients and who underwent either open, endoscopic, or robot-assisted surgery for urological malignancy. Materials and Methods: During the peak of COVID-19 pandemic from March 21, 2020, to June 21, 2020, all the uro-oncology cases managed in our tertiary care hospital were analyzed. Teleconsultation was started for follow-up patients. All patients requiring surgery underwent reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction for COVID-19. Institutional protocol was formulated based on existing international guidelines for patient management. Adequate personal protection and hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis were provided to health-care professionals. Results: During the study period, 417 outpatient consultations were made. Forty-nine patients underwent surgery for different urological malignancies. Majority of the surgeries were robot-assisted surgeries (59.2%, 29 patients), followed by endoscopic procedures (28.5%, 14 patients) and few open procedures (10.2%, five patients). Most of our patients were elderly males (mean, 62.5 years). With a median follow-up of 55 days (interquartile range, 32-77), there was no report of COVID-19 infection in any patient or health-care provider. Conclusions: We can continue treating needy cancer patients with minimal risk by taking all precautions. Our initial experience of managing uro-oncology cases during this pandemic is encouraging. Robotic surgeries can be safely performed.

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.

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.

All-printed soft human-machine interface for robotic physicochemical sensing.

Ultrasensitive multimodal physicochemical sensing for autonomous robotic decision-making has numerous applications in agriculture, security, environmental protection, and public health. Previously reported robotic sensing technologies have primarily focused on monitoring physical parameters such as pressure and temperature. Integrating chemical sensors for autonomous dry-phase analyte detection on a robotic platform is rather extremely challenging and substantially underdeveloped. Here, we introduce an artificial intelligence-powered multimodal robotic sensing system (M-Bot) with an all-printed mass-producible soft electronic skin-based human-machine interface. A scalable inkjet printing technology with custom-developed nanomaterial inks was used to manufacture flexible physicochemical sensor arrays for electrophysiology recording, tactile perception, and robotic sensing of a wide range of hazardous materials including nitroaromatic explosives, pesticides, nerve agents, and infectious pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2. The M-Bot decodes the surface electromyography signals collected from the human body through machine learning algorithms for remote robotic control and can perform in situ threat compound detection in extreme or contaminated environments with user-interactive tactile and threat alarm feedback. The printed electronic skin-based robotic sensing technology can be further generalized and applied to other remote sensing platforms. Such diversity was validated on an intelligent multimodal robotic boat platform that can efficiently track the source of trace amounts of hazardous compounds through autonomous and intelligent decision-making algorithms. This fully printed human-machine interactive multimodal sensing technology could play a crucial role in designing future intelligent robotic systems and can be easily reconfigured toward numerous practical wearable and robotic applications.

Robotic Repair of Complicated Vesico-[utero]/Cervicovaginal Fistula after Cesarean Section.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate intra- and postoperative steps in a successful management of a complicated vesico-[utero]/cervicovaginal fistula. DESIGN: Stepwise demonstration of the technique with narrated video footage. SETTING: A urogenital fistula in developed countries mostly occurs after gynecologic surgeries but rarely from obstetric complications. The main treatment of a urogenital fistula is either transvaginal or transabdominal surgical repair. We present a case of a 36-year-old woman, gravida 3 para 3-0-0-3, who developed a complicated large vesico-[utero]/cervicovaginal fistula after an emergent repeat cesarean section. Robotic repair was performed 2 months after the injury using the modified O'Connor method. Blood loss was minimal, and the patient was discharged from the hospital 1 day postoperatively. Follow-up showed complete healing of the fistula with no urine leakage, frequency of urination, or dyspareunia. The patient resumed normal bladder function and menstrual period up to 4 months after the repair procedure. INTERVENTIONS: The basic surgical principle of urogenital fistula repair is demonstrated: (1) development of vesicovaginal spaces by dissection of the bladder from the uterus and the vagina, (2) meticulous hemostasis, (3) adequate freshened of the fistula edges, (4) tension-free and watertight closure of the bladder. We also demonstrate some other techniques that have developed though our own practice: (1) facilitating bladder distention by temporarily blocking the fistula, (2) placement of a ureteral catheter to protect the ureters, (3) interposition with omental flap, (4) single layer through and through closure of a cystotomy with 2-0 V-Loc suture (Covidien, Irvington, NJ). CONCLUSION: Complicated urogenital fistulas may be repaired successfully using minimally invasive surgery using robotic assistance, enabling less blood loss, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications, etc.

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.

Robotic Resection of a Left Brachiocephalic Vein Aneurysm Mimicking Thymoma.

A 70-year-old man was scheduled for the robotic resection of a 21×16 × 30 mm thymic nodule incidentally detected by a computed tomography scan (CT) for thoracic trauma after a domestic accident. Positron emission tomography (PET) scan confirmed a low [18F]-FDG uptake (SUVmax = 1,9). During the surgery, the mass showed to be a saccular aneurysm of the left brachiocephalic vein (LBCV). A complete tangential resection of the aneurysm, with the use of EndoGIA stapler (Covidien® Endo GIA™) at its origin, was performed. The patient's recovery was uneventful, and postoperative CT with contrast administration confirmed the patency of the vein.

Intraoperative Measures to Reduce the Risk of COVID-19 Transmission During Minimally Invasive Procedures: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Societies' Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus 2019 pandemic and the hypothetical risk of virus transmission through aerosolized CO2 or surgical smoke produced during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures have prompted societies to issue recommendations on measures to reduce this risk. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, summarize and critically appraise recommendations from surgical societies on intraoperative measures to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the operative room (OR) staff during MIS. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched using a search strategy or free terms. The search was supplemented with searches of additional relevant records on coronavirus 2019 resource websites from Surgical Associations and Societies. Recommendations published by surgical societies that reported on the intraoperative methods to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to the OR staff during MIS were also reviewed for inclusion. Expert opinion articles were excluded. A preliminary synthesis was performed of the extracted data to categorize and itemize the different types of recommendations. The results were then summarized in a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-three recommendation were included in the study. Most recommendations were targeted to general surgery (13) and gynecology (8). Areas covered by the documents were recommendations on performance of laparoscopic/robotic surgery versus open approach (28 documents), selection of surgical staff (13), management of pneumoperitoneum (33), use of energy devices (20), and management of surgical smoke and pneumoperitoneum desufflation (33) with varying degree of consensus on the specific recommendations among the documents. CONCLUSIONS: While some of the early recommendations advised against the use of MIS, they were not strictly based on the available scientific evidence. After further consideration of the literature and of the well-known benefits of laparoscopy to the patient, later recommendations shifted to encouraging the use of MIS as long as adequate precautions could be taken to protect the safety of the OR staff. The release and implementation of recommendations should be based on evidence-based practices that allows health care systems to provide safe surgical and medical assistance.

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.

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.

A critical review of the safety of minimally invasive surgery in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected surgical practice around the world. While several abdominal emergencies can be managed effectively and safely using minimally invasive surgery (MIS), the safety of using MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic has been debated. MIS, including laparoscopy and robotic surgery, is considered an aerosol-generating procedure and some recent research demonstrated possible spread of the virus through aerosol. This review assessed the available evidence on the safety of MIS in the COVID-19 era, explored the possible precautions to be taken when using MIS to prevent exposure of the operating team to infection, and highlighted the recommendations of several surgical societies in this regard. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic databases, Google Scholar, and pre-print archives were searched for evidence on airborne transmission of COVID-19 and the safety of MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations of recognized surgical societies were also searched. The available evidence was summarized in a narrative manner. RESULTS: Limited data on the possibility of airborne transmission of COVID-19 were found. The studies that reported on the presence of the SARS-COV-2 in the air samples of patients with COVID-19 had conflicting results. Several precautions to minimize the presumed risk of exposure of the operation room staff to COVID-19 were devised. CONCLUSION: According to the available evidence and recommendations of different surgical societies, MIS may be used in the treatment of acute abdominal emergency. However, considerable caution should be taken to avoid the presumed risk of aerosolization of the virus particles during the procedure, which may expose the operating staff to the risk of COVID-19.

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.

Managing Patients with Prostate Cancer During COVID-19 Pandemic: The Experience of a High-Volume Robotic Surgery Center.

Objectives: To report our experience and lessons learned as high-volume center of robotic surgery managing patients with prostate cancer since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in our center. Materials and Methods: We described some critical changes in our routine to minimize the COVID infection among patients and health care workers. From March 1 to May 25, 2020, we described our actions and surgical outcomes of patients treated in our center during the pandemic. Results: Preventing hospital visits, we implemented some modifications in our office routine in terms of patient appointment, follow-up, and management of nonsurgical candidates. In this period, 147 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) without intraoperative complications. The median operative time and blood loss were 91 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] = 25) and 50 mL (IQR = 50), respectively. The median hospitalization time was 15.8 hours (IQR = 2.5). None of the patients of our study had COVID in the postoperative follow-up, and only two patients were rescheduled due to a positive rapid COVID test 1 day before surgery. The final pathology described 10 patients (6.8%) Grade Group (GrGp) 1, 34 (23.1%) GrGp 2, 31 (21%) GrGp 3, 16 (10.8%) GrGp 4, 37 (25.3%) GrGp 5, and 19 (13%) with deferred Gleason. Two patients, COVID negative, were readmitted due to infected lymphocele managed with antibiotic and Interventional Radiology drainage. Conclusion: Our experience managing patients with prostate cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that changing the office routine, stratifying the patients according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk, and adopting COVID-based criteria to select patients for surgery are necessary actions to maintain the best quality of treatment and minimize the viral infection among our oncological patients. In our routine, the RARP during the COVID pandemic is safe and feasible for patients and health care workers if the necessary precautions described in this article are taken.

To defer or not to defer? A German longitudinal multicentric assessment of clinical practice in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: After the outbreak of COVID-19 unprecedented changes in the healthcare systems worldwide were necessary resulting in a reduction of urological capacities with postponements of consultations and surgeries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An email was sent to 66 urological hospitals with focus on robotic surgery (RS) including a link to a questionnaire (e.g. bed/staff capacity, surgical caseload, protection measures during RS) that covered three time points: a representative baseline week prior to COVID-19, the week of March 16th-22nd and April 20th-26th 2020. The results were evaluated using descriptive analyses. RESULTS: 27 out of 66 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate: 41%). We found a decrease of 11% in hospital beds and 25% in OR capacity with equal reductions for endourological, open and robotic procedures. Primary surgical treatment of urolithiasis and benign prostate syndrome (BPS) but also of testicular and penile cancer dropped by at least 50% while the decrease of surgeries for prostate, renal and urothelial cancer (TUR-B and cystectomies) ranged from 15 to 37%. The use of personal protection equipment (PPE), screening of staff and patients and protection during RS was unevenly distributed in the different centers-however, the number of COVID-19 patients and urologists did not reach double digits. CONCLUSION: The German urological landscape has changed since the outbreak of COVID-19 with a significant shift of high priority surgeries but also continuation of elective surgical treatments. While screening and staff protection is employed heterogeneously, the number of infected German urologists stays low.