Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison between intra- and postoperative outcomes of the da Vinci SP and da Vinci Xi robotic platforms in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The new SP robot incorporates a single trocar that houses a flexible camera and three bi-articulated arms, which minimize the number of incisions needed to assess the surgical site, allowing for a less invasive procedure. To compare the postoperative pain scale and outcomes in patients with similar demographic characteristics undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with SP and Xi robots, One-hundred consecutive patients undergoing RARP with the SP robot were matched, using a propensity score (PS), with 100 patients from a cohort of 1757 who were operated on with the da Vinci Xi from June 2019 to January 2021. We described and compared the perioperative pain scores and outcomes of both groups. The SP group had less blood loss (50 cc vs. 62.5 cc, P < 0.001) and longer operative time (114 min. vs. 94 min, P < 0.001). The only period we could show a difference in postoperative pain scores was 6 h after surgery, with a small advantage for the SP (2 vs. 2.5, P < 0.001). Both groups had satisfactory postoperative continence recovery, 91% vs. 90% for the SP and Xi, respectively. The groups had a mean follow-up of 24.5 and 22 months for SP and Xi, respectively. The tumor stage and percentage of positive surgical margins were similar between groups (15% vs. 15%, P = 1). Patients undergoing RARP with the SP had longer operative times with less blood loss than the Xi. However, despite the lower number of abdominal incisions on the SP, the groups had similar intraoperative performance, and we were unable to demonstrate clinically significant differences in postoperative pain scores between the groups 6, 12, and 18 h after surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kaouk JH, Haber GP, Autorino R et al (2014) A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery first clinical investigation. Eur Urol 66(6):1033–1043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.06.039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Rogers T et al (2021) Applications of the da Vinci single port (SP) robotic platform in urology: a systematic literature review. Min Urol Nephrol. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03899-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Moschovas MC, Seetharam Bhat KR, Onol FF et al (2021) Single-port technique evolution and current practice in urologic procedures. Asian J Urol. 8(1):100–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2020.05.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Austin PC (2021) Informing power and sample size calculations when using inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score. Stat Med 40(27):6150–6163. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.9176

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Rubin DB (1973) The use of matched sampling and regression adjustment to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 29(1):185. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Austin PC (2009) Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 28(25):3083–3107. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3697

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Moschovas MC, Patel V (2022) Neurovascular bundle preservation in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: How I do it after 15.000 cases. Int Braz J Urol 48(2):212–219. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.99.04

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Moschovas MC, Patel V (2022) Nerve-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: how I do it after 15.000 cases. Int Braz J Urol 48(2):369–370. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.99.03

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kumar A, Patel VR, Panaiyadiyan S, Seetharam Bhat KR, Moschovas MC, Nayak B (2021) Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Current perspectives. Asian J Urol 8(1):2–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2020.05.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Onol FF et al (2020) modified apical dissection and lateral prostatic fascia preservation improves early postoperative functional recovery in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results from a propensity score–matched analysis. Eur Urol 78(6):875–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Basourakos SP, Kowalczyk KJ, Moschovas M et al (2021) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy maneuvers to attenuate erectile dysfunction: technical description and video compilation. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2021.0081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rocha MFH, Picanço Neto JM (2021) Filgueira PH de O, Coelho RF, Moschovas MC, Patel V Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with preceptor’s assistance: the training experience and outcomes in South America. J Robot Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-021-01233-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bhat KRS, Moschovas MC, Onol FF et al (2021) Evidence-based evolution of our robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) technique through 13,000 cases. J Robot Surg 15(4):651–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01157-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Martini A, Falagario UG, Villers A et al (2020) Contemporary techniques of prostate dissection for robot-assisted prostatectomy. Eur Urol 78(4):583–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.07.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Onol F, Rogers T, Patel V (2021) Early outcomes of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: lessons learned from the learning-curve experience. BJU Int 127(1):114–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Rogers T, Noel J, Reddy S, Patel V (2021) Da vinci single-port robotic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2020.1090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Rogers T et al (2020) Technical modifications necessary to implement the da vinci single-port robotic system. Eur Urol 78(3):415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.01.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moschovas MC, Bhat S, Sandri M et al (2021) Comparing the approach to radical prostatectomy using the multiport da Vinci Xi and da Vinci SP robots: a propensity score analysis of perioperative outcomes. Eur Urol 79(3):393–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Covas Moschovas M, Kind S, Bhat SK et al (2021) Implementing the da Vinci SP® without increasing positive surgical margins: experience and pathological outcomes of a prostate cancer referral center. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2021.0656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moschovas MC, Brady I, Jaber AR et al (2022) Da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: a multicentric collaboration and step-by-step techniques. Int Braz J Urol 48(4):728–729. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.99.15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Moschovas MC, Brady I, Noel J et al (2022) Contemporary techniques of da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: multicentric collaboration and expert opinion. Int Braz J Urol 48(4):696–705. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.99.16

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Seetharam Bhat KR, Moschovas MC, Onol FF et al (2020) Trends in clinical and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy before and after the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against PSA screening: a decade of experience. BJU Int 125(6):884–892. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15051

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bhat KRS, Covas Moschovas M, Sandri M et al (2021) A predictive preoperative and postoperative nomogram for postoperative potency recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 206(4):942–951. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001895

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bhat KRS, Covas Moschovas M, Sandri M et al (2021) Stratification of potency outcomes following robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy based on age, preoperative potency, and nerve sparing. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2021.0141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vigneswaran HT, Schwarzman LS, Francavilla S, Abern MR, Crivellaro S (2020) A Comparison of perioperative outcomes between single-port and multiport robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 77(6):671–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rogers T, Bhat KRS, Moschovas M et al (2021) Use of transversus abdominis plane block to decrease pain scores and narcotic use following robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 15(1):81–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01064-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Moschovas MC, Corder C, Patel V (2022) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with a single port platform: current and future perspectives of a referral center. Int Braz J Urol 48(5):864–866. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.9978

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Abou Zeinab M, Beksac AT, Ferguson E, Kaviani A, Kaouk J (2022) Transvesical versus extraperitoneal single-port robotic radical prostatectomy: a matched-pair analysis. World J Urol 40(8):2001–2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04056-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Godtman RA, Persson E, Cazzaniga W et al (2021) Association of surgeon and hospital volume with short-term outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Nationwide, population-based study. PLoS ONE 16(6):e0253081. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253081

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Barzi A, Klein EA, Dorff TB, Quinn DI, Sadeghi S (2016) Prostatectomy at high-volume centers improves outcomes and lowers the costs of care for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19(1):84–91. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AdventHealth Global Robotics Institute, 380 Celebration Place Suite # 410, Celebration, FL, 34747, USA

    Marcio Covas Moschovas, David Loy, Evan Patel & Vipul Patel

  2. University of Central Florida (UCF), Orlando, FL, USA

    Marcio Covas Moschovas & Vipul Patel

  3. Big and Open Data Innovation Laboratory (BODaI-Lab) and Data Methods and Systems Statistical, Brescia, Italy

    Marco Sandri

  4. Hospital e Maternidade Brasil, Santo Andre, Brazil

    Daniel Moser

Authors
  1. Marcio Covas Moschovas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Loy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Evan Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marco Sandri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel Moser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vipul Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Moschovas and V. Patel were responsible for the intellectual content and supervision, Daniel Moser was responsible for drafting of the article, Sandri and Moschovas were responsible for the statistical analysis, Loy and E.Patel were responsible for tables, figures, and article drafting.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcio Covas Moschovas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no disclosures related to this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (TIF 3745 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moschovas, M.C., Loy, D., Patel, E. et al. Comparison between intra- and postoperative outcomes of the da Vinci SP and da Vinci Xi robotic platforms in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Robotic Surg 17, 1341–1347 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01563-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01563-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation