Nefroureterectomía radical asistida por robot para el carcinoma urotelial del tracto urinario superior: resultados peri y postoperatorios / Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Peri and postoperative outcomes

Introducción La nefroureterectomía radical constituye el tratamiento de los tumores uroteliales del tracto urinario superior con alto riesgo de mortalidad específica. La nefroureterectomía radical laparoscópica asistida por robot (NURAR) todavía está siendo investigada para establecer de manera concluyente la seguridad del procedimiento en el tratamiento de los tumores uroteliales del tracto urinario superior. El objetivo principal es evaluar la seguridad intra y postoperatoria de la NURAR y, posteriormente, evaluar los resultados oncológicos a mediano plazo. Métodos Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo monocéntrico basado en una recopilación de NURAR realizadas entre el 1 de enero de 2015 y el 1 de octubre de 2021. Las NURAR se llevaron a cabo con la asistencia del robot Da Vinci Si® y, desde 2017, con el robot Da Vinci Xi®. Siempre que fue posible, la totalidad del procedimiento se llevó a cabo sin reacoplamiento (re-docking). Resultados Entre el 1 de enero de 2015 y el 1 de octubre de 2021, se realizaron 29 NURAR en nuestro centro. En el 80% de los casos se pudo realizar toda la cirugía sin reacoplamiento con el robot Da Vinci Xi®. Un paciente requirió conversión a cirugía abierta por dificultad en la disección. El 50% de los tumores se clasificaron como T3 o T4. La tasa de complicaciones a los 30 días fue del 31%. La duración media de la estancia hospitalaria fue de 5 días. La supervivencia libre de enfermedad en el tiempo medio de supervivencia (27,5 meses) fue del 75,2%. Un paciente tuvo una recidiva en el compartimento de la nefrectomía y ningún paciente tuvo recidiva peritoneal o en los orificios de los trocares. Conclusión La realización de NURAR para el tratamiento de los tumores del tracto urinario superior parece cumplir los criterios de seguridad quirúrgica y oncológica (AU)

Introduction The treatment of urothelial tumours of the upper urinary tract at high risk of specific mortality is based on radical nephroureterectomy. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (RARNU) is still under investigation to definitively establish the safety of this procedure in the management of urothelial tumours of the upper urinary tract. The primary objective is to evaluate the intra- and postoperative safety of RARNU and, subsequently, to evaluate the medium-term oncological results. Methods Our study is a retrospective, mono-centric study with a collection of RARNUs conducted between 1st January 2015 and 1st October 2021. The RARNUs were performed with the assistance of the Da Vinci Si® robot, then from 2017 the Da Vinci Xi® robot. Whenever possible, the entire procedure was carried out without re-docking. Results Between 1st January 2015 and 1st October 2021, 29 RARNUs were carried out at our centre. Complete surgery without re-docking was possible in 80% of cases with the Da Vinci Xi® robot. One patient required conversion to open surgery due to difficult dissection. A percentage of 50 of tumours were classified as T3 or T4. The 30-day complication rate was 31%. The median length of hospitalisation was 5 days. The disease-free survival at the mean survival time (27.5 months) was of 75.2%. One patient had a recurrence in the nephrectomy compartment and no patient had a peritoneal or trocar orifice recurrence. Conclusion Performing RARNU for the management of tumours of the upper urinary tract appears to meet the criteria of surgical safety and those of oncological safety (AU)

Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Peri and postoperative outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of urothelial tumours of the upper urinary tract at high risk of specific mortality is based on radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (RARNU) is still under investigation to definitively establish the safety of this procedure in the management of urothelial tumours of the upper urinary tract. The primary objective is to evaluate the intra- and postoperative safety of RARNU and, subsequently, to evaluate the medium-term oncological results. METHODS: Our study is a retrospective, mono-centric study with a collection of RARNUs conducted between 1st January 2015 and 1st October 2021. The RARNUs were performed with the assistance of the Da Vinci Si® robot, then from 2017 the Da Vinci Xi® robot. Whenever possible, the entire procedure was carried out without re-docking. RESULTS: Between 1st January 2015 and 1st October 2021, 29 RARNUs were carried out at our centre. Complete surgery without re-docking was possible in 80% of cases with the Da Vinci Xi® robot. One patient required conversion to open surgery due to difficult dissection. 50% of tumours were classified as T3 or T4. The 30-day complication rate was 31%. The median length of hospitalisation was 5 days. The disease-free survival at the mean survival time (27.5 months) was of 75.2%. One patient had a recurrence in the nephrectomy compartment and no patient had a peritoneal or trocar orifice recurrence. CONCLUSION: Performing RARNU for the management of tumours of the upper urinary tract appears to meet the criteria of surgical safety and those of oncological safety.

CyberKnife Radiosurgery for refractory bilateral trigeminal neuralgia. Case report

Case description: A case of a 37-year-old female patient suffering from refractory bilateral trigeminal neuralgia is presented, who underwent various interventions such as acupuncture, block therapies and even microvascular decompression without effective pain relief. Clinical findings: Paresthesias and shooting-like twinges of pain intensity 10/10 in bilateral maxillary and mandibular branches of the trigeminal nerve, with nasal and intraoral triggers that made eating impossible, becoming increasingly severe since refractoriness to microvascular decompression and carbamazepines, triggering the twinges even during sleep, generating somnolence, depressive mood and social isolation. Treatment and results: The patient was evaluated by an interdisciplinary neuro-oncology team, where, in accordance with the analysis of the brain magnetic resonance imaging and the patient's history, it was indicated to perform Cyberknife® radiosurgery in monofraction on the left trigeminal and subsequently treat the contralateral trigeminal. When treated with Cyberknife® radiosurgery, the patient reported absolute improvement in her pain for 2 years. Clinical relevance: Radiosurgery by CyberKnife is not yet the first line of management in trigeminal neuralgia, however, it should be considered since several studies have managed to demonstrate an increase in the quality of life of patients and pain relief in refractory or severe cases. of said pathology.

Descripción del caso: Se presenta un caso de paciente femenino de 37 años que padecía neuralgia del trigémino bilateral refractaria, tratada con terapias alternativas, cirugía de descompresión microvascular, analgesia multimodal y terapias de bloqueo sin alivio efectivo del dolor. Hallazgos clínicos: Parestesias y punzadas tipo disparo de intensidad del dolor 10/10 en ramas maxilar y mandibular bilaterales del nervio trigémino, con gatillos nasales e intraorales que imposibilitaban comer, tornándose cada vez más severa desde refractariedad a descompresión microvascular y carbamazepinas, desencadenándose las punzadas incluso en el sueño, provocando somnolencia, animo depresivo y aislamiento social. Tratamiento y resultados: La paciente fue sometida a valoración por equipo interdisciplinario de neurooncología, donde en concordancia con el análisis de la resonancia magnética cerebral y los antecedentes de la paciente, se indicó realización de radiocirugía por Cyberknife en monofracción sobre trigémino izquierdo y posteriormente tratar el contralateral. Al ser tratada con radiocirugía Cyberknife® la paciente refiere mejora absoluta de su dolor desde hace 2 años. Relevancia clínica: La Radiocirugía por Cyberknife aún no es primera línea de manejo en neuralgia del trigémino, sin embargo, debería considerarse ya que diversos estudios han logrado demostrar un aumento en la calidad de vida de los pacientes y alivio del dolor en casos refractarios o graves de dicha patología.

Desafío y futuro de la cirugía robótica hepática y pancreática. Análisis de 64 casos en una unidad especializada / Challenge and future of liver and pancreatic robotic surgery. Analysis of 64 cases in a specialized unit

Introducción: La cirugía robótica ha demostrado su eficacia en ciertos procedimientos quirúrgicos. Sin embargo, en cirugía hepática y pancreática (HBP) su uso es todavía poco frecuente. Se presenta la experiencia inicial en cirugía robótica HBP de una unidad especializada en un hospital de tercer nivel. Método: Se han estudiado en forma prospectiva los resultados de los pacientes intervenidos de cirugía HBP robótica entre abril de 2018 y octubre de 2020. Los datos analizados corresponden a datos demográficos, técnicas quirúrgicas realizadas y morbimortalidad asociada. Resultados Se intervinieron 64 pacientes, sometidos a 35 hepatectomías (mayores [6,7%], anatómicas [52,9%], limitadas [34,4%], quistectomías [3%] y marsupializaciones [3%]) y 29 pancreatectomías/resecciones duodenales (distales [48,2%], centrales [6,9%], cefálicas [13,8%], enucleaciones [24,1%], ampulectomías [3,5%] y resecciones duodenales [3,5%]).En cirugía hepática el tiempo operatorio medio fue de 204,4 minutos (100-265 min), la mediana de complicaciones postoperatorias según la escala de Clavien-Dindo fue de uno (1-4), las pérdidas hemáticas medias de 166,7 mL (100-300 mL), no existió conversión y la estancia postoperatoria media de cuatro días (2-14 días).En cirugía pancreática el tiempo operatorio medio fue de 243,8 minutos (125-460 min), la mediana de complicaciones postoperatorias de dos (1-4), las pérdidas hemáticas de 202,3 mL (100-500 mL) asociadas a una tasa de conversión del 17,8% y una estancia media de siete días (3-23 días). Conclusiones: La cirugía robótica HBP es segura y factible. Se sugiere que su uso facilita la cirugía conservadora de parénquima, el acceso a segmentos posteriores hepáticos y la realización de anastomosis en la reconstrucción pancreática respecto a la cirugía laparoscópica (AU)

Introduction: Robotic surgery has proven effective in certain surgical procedures. However, in liver and pancreatic surgery (HBP) its use is still rare. The initial experience in HBP robotic surgery of a specialized unit of a tertiary hospital is presented. results of patients undergoing robotic HBP surgery between April 2018 and October 2020 have been prospectively studied. The data analyzed correspond to demographic data, surgical techniques performed, associated morbidity and mortality.Results64 patients were operated, corresponding to 35 hepatectomies (major [6.7%], anatomic [52.9%], limited [34.4%], cystectomies [3%] and marsupialization [3%]), 29 pancreatectomies (distal [48.2%], central [6.9%], cephalic [13.8%], enucleations [24.1%], ampullectomies [3.5%] and duodenal resections [3.5%]).In liver surgery the mean operative time was 204.4 minutes (100-265 min), the median postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo scale was one (1-4), the mean blood losses 166.7 mL (100-300 mL), there was no conversion and the mean postoperative stay was four days (2-14 days).In pancreatic surgery, the mean operative time was 243.8 minutes (125-460 min), the median of postoperative complications was two (1-4), blood loss of 202.3 mL (100-500 mL) associated to a conversion rate 17.8% and an average stay of seven days (3-23 days).Conclusions: Robotic HBP surgery is safe and feasible. It is suggested that its use facilitates parenchymal sparing surgery, access to posterior liver segments and anastomosis in pancreatic reconstruction compared to laparoscopic surgery (AU)

Challenge and future of liver and pancreatic robotic surgery. Analysis of 64 cases in a specialized unit.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery has proven effective in certain surgical procedures. However, in liver and pancreatic surgery (HBP) its use is still rare. The initial experience in HBP robotic surgery of a specialized unit of a tertiary hospital is presented. METHOD: The results of patients undergoing robotic HBP surgery between April 2018 and October 2020 have been prospectively studied. The data analyzed correspond to demographic data, surgical techniques performed, associated morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 64 patients were operated, corresponding to 35 hepatectomies (major [6.7%], anatomic [52.9%], limited [34.4%], cystectomies [3%] and marsupialization [3%]), 29 pancreatectomies (distal [48.2%], central [6.9%], cephalic [13.8%], enucleations [24.1%], ampullectomies [3.5%] and duodenal resections [3.5%]). In liver surgery the mean operative time was 204.4 min (100-265 min), the median postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo scale was one (1-4), the mean blood losses 166.7 mL (100-300 mL), there was no conversion and the mean postoperative stay was four days (2-14 days). In pancreatic surgery, the mean operative time was 243.8 min (125-460 min), the median of postoperative complications was two (1-4), blood loss of 202.3 mL (100-500 mL) associated to a conversion rate 17.8% and an average stay of seven days (3-23 days). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic HBP surgery is safe and feasible. It is suggested that its use facilitates parenchymal sparing surgery, access to posterior liver segments and anastomosis in pancreatic reconstruction compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Lesões de pele ocasionadas por procedimento robótico versus aberto / Skin injuries occasioned by robotic procedure versus open

Objetivo: identificar fatores associados a lesões de pele decorrentes de cirurgias urológicas robóticas versus convencionais em adultos/idosos. Método: revisão integrativa, etapas: Construção do protocolo de pesquisa; Formulação da pergunta - prática baseada em evidência, utilizando o acrônimo PICO; Definição dos descritores das estratégias de busca em cada uma das bases de dados selecionadas, que deviam ser variadas; Determinação, seleção e revisão dos critérios de inclusão e exclusão; Avaliação crítica dos estudos; Coleta de dados utilizando instrumentos que analisassem em pares; e Síntese dos resultados/dados agrupados por semelhança. Resultados: a estratégia de busca gerou 207 artigos. Resultando para análise final 7 artigos. Conclusão: são necessários novos estudos clínicos, que abordem os prejuízos e benefícios relacionados ao posicionamento cirúrgico robótico e abertos, direcionando assim, intervenções de enfermagem acuradas aos pacientes sob maior risco.(AU)

Objective: to identify factors associated with skin lesions resulting from robotic versus conventional urological surgery in adults / elderly. Method: integrative review, stages: Construction of the research protocol; Formulation of the question - evidence-based practice, using the acronym PICO; Definition of search strategy descriptors in each of the selected databases, which should be varied; Determination, selection and review of inclusion and exclusion criteria; Critical evaluation of studies; Data collection using instruments that analyzed in pairs; and Summary of results / data grouped by similarity. Results: the search strategy generated 207 articles. Resulting in 7 articles for final analysis. Conclusion: further clinical studies are needed, addressing the losses and benefits related to robotic and open surgical positioning, thus directing accurate nursing interventions to patients at higher risk.(AU)

Objetivo: identificar los factores asociados a las lesiones cutáneas resultantes de la cirugía urológica robótica versus convencional en adultos / ancianos. Método: revisión integradora, etapas: construcción del protocolo de investigación; Formulación de la pregunta - práctica basada en evidencia, utilizando el acrónimo PICO; Definición de descriptores de estrategias de búsqueda en cada una de las bases de datos seleccionadas, que deben ser variadas; Determinación, selección y revisión de criterios de inclusión y exclusión; Evaluación crítica de estudios; Recolección de datos utilizando instrumentos que se analizaron por parejas; y Resumen de resultados / datos agrupados por similitud. Resultados: la estrategia de búsqueda generó 207 artículos. Resultando en 7 artículos para el análisis final. Conclusión: se necesitan más estudios clínicos que aborden las pérdidas y beneficios relacionados con el posicionamiento quirúrgico robótico y abierto, dirigiendo así intervenciones de enfermería precisas a los pacientes de mayor riesgo.(AU)

Challenge and future of liver and pancreatic robotic surgery. Analysis of 64 cases in a specialized unit. / Desafío y futuro de la cirugía robótica hepática y pancreática. Análisis de 64 casos en una unidad especializada.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery has proven effective in certain surgical procedures. However, in liver and pancreatic surgery (HBP) its use is still rare. The initial experience in HBP robotic surgery of a specialized unit of a tertiary hospital is presented. METHOD: The results of patients undergoing robotic HBP surgery between April 2018 and October 2020 have been prospectively studied. The data analyzed correspond to demographic data, surgical techniques performed, associated morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 64 patients were operated, corresponding to 35 hepatectomies (major [6.7%], anatomic [52.9%], limited [34.4%], cystectomies [3%] and marsupialization [3%]), 29 pancreatectomies (distal [48.2%], central [6.9%], cephalic [13.8%], enucleations [24.1%], ampullectomies [3.5%] and duodenal resections [3.5%]). In liver surgery the mean operative time was 204.4 minutes (100-265 min), the median postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo scale was one (1-4), the mean blood losses 166.7 mL (100-300 mL), there was no conversion and the mean postoperative stay was four days (2-14 days). In pancreatic surgery, the mean operative time was 243.8 minutes (125-460 min), the median of postoperative complications was two (1-4), blood loss of 202.3 mL (100-500 mL) associated to a conversion rate 17.8% and an average stay of seven days (3-23 days). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic HBP surgery is safe and feasible. It is suggested that its use facilitates parenchymal sparing surgery, access to posterior liver segments and anastomosis in pancreatic reconstruction compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Reconstruction of oropharyngeal defects after transoral robotic surgery. Review and recommendations of the Commission of Head and Neck Surgery of the Spanish Society of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery. / Reconstrucción de defectos orofaríngeos tras cirugía transoral robótica. Revisión y recomendaciones de la Comisión de Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello de la Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello.

Transoral surgery of the oropharynx has seen an important evolution in recent years, expanding the surgical options available (TORS, TOUSS, TOLS). The capacity to resect increasingly extensive lesions and the number of patients who benefit from them. This fact has led to an evolution in the reconstruction of surgical defects after transoral surgery. This article aims to review the possible reconstructive techniques, indications and factors to be taken into account prior to surgery, proposing a protocol to assess the need for transoral reconstruction based on the depth of the defect, the staging, and previous treatment.