Single-Site Robotic Urologic Surgery: Current Applications and Future Technology

  • Daniel Ramirez
  • Matthew J. Maurice
  • Jihad H. KaoukEmail author


Utilization of robotics in urologic surgery has been broadly popularized as it provides substantial advantages over conventional laparoscopic and open approaches, including improved fine dexterity, three-dimensional high-definition magnified optics, and augmented ergonomics. Accordingly, these features have facilitated the espousal of robotics for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) to surmount challenges with instrument clashing, intra-corporeal suturing, and intra-abdominal triangulation. Herein we discuss currently available single-site robotic techniques and technology while focusing on specific urology procedures and the future of RLESS.


Minimally invasive surgery Robotic surgery Singe site surgery 


  1. 1.
    Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, Crouzet S, Stein RJ. Robotic single-port transumbilical surgery in humans: initial report. BJU Int. 2008;103:366–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stein RJ, White WM, Geol RK, Irwin BH, Haber GP, Kaouk JH. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery using GelPort as the access platform. Eur Urol. 2010;57:132–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    White MA, Autorino R, Spana G, Laydner H, Hillyer SP, Khanna R, et al. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy: surgical techniques and comparative outcomes. Eur Urol. 2011;59:815–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    White MA, Haber GP, Autorino R, Khanna R, Forest S, Yang B, et al. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy: technique and early outcomes. Eur Urol. 2010;58:544–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arkoncel FR, Lee JW, Rha KH, Han WK, Jeoung HB, Oh CK. Two-port robot-assisted vs standard robot-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair comparison. Urology. 2011;78:581–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Olweny EO, Park SK, Tan YK, Gurbus C, Caddedu J, Best SL. Perioperative comparison of robotic assisted laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) pyeloplasty versus conventional LESS pyeloplasty. Eur Urol. 2012;61:410–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joseph RA, Goh AC, Cuevas SP, Donovan MA, Kauffman MG, Salas NA, et al. Chostick surgery: a novel technique improves surgeon performance and eliminates arm collision in robotic single-incision laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1331–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haber GP, White MA, Autorino R, Escobar PF, Kroh MD, Chalikonda S, et al. Novel robotic da Vinci instruments for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery. Urology. 2010;76:1279–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Komninos C, Shin TY, Tuliao P, Yoon YE, Koo KC, Chang CH, et al. R-LESS partial nephrectomy trifecta outcomes is inferior to multiport robotic partial nephrectomy: comparative analysis. Eur Urol. 2014;66:512–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Janetschek G. Robotics: will they give a new kick to single-site surgery? Eur Urol. 2014;66:1044–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaouk JH, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Han DH, Lee SW, Yinghao S, et al. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1076 cases. Eur Urol. 2011;60:998–1005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    White MA, Autorino R, Spana G, Hillyer S, Stein RJ, Kaouk JH. Robotic laparoendoscopic single site urological surgery: analysis of 50 consecutive cases. J Urol. 2012;187:1696–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee JW, Arkoncel FRP, Rha KH, Choi KH, Yu HS, Chae Y, et al. Urologic robot-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site surgery using a homemade single-port device: a single-center experience of 68 cases. J Endourol. 2011;25:1481–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Joseph RA, Salas NA, Johnson C, Goh A, Cuevas SP, Donovan MA, et al. Chopstick surgery: a novel technique enables use of the da Vinci robot to perform single-incision laparoscopic surgery [video]. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:3224.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cestari A, Buffi NM, Lista G, Lughezzani G, Larcher A, Lazzeri M, et al. Feasibility and preliminary clinic outcomes of robotic laparoendoscopic single-site (R-LESS) pyeloplasty using a new single-port platform. Eur Urol. 2012;62:175–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, et al. Single port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72:1190–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fareed K, Zaytoun OM, Autorino R, White WM, Crouzet S, Yakoubi R, et al. Robotic single port suprapubic transvesicle enucleation of the prostate (R-STEP): initial experience. BJU Int. 2012;110:732–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laydner H, Akca O, Autorino R, Eyraud R, Zargar H, Brandao LF, et al. Perineal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in the cadaver model. J Endourol. 2014;28(12):1479–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Akca O, Zargar H, Kaouk JH. Robotic surgery revives radical perineal prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):340–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pietrabissa A, Pugliese L, Vinci A, Peri A, Peri A, Tinozzi FP, Cavazzi E, et al. Short-term outcomes of a single-site robotic cholecystectomy versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. Surg Endosc. 2016 Jul;30(7):3089–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Ramirez
    • 1
  • Matthew J. Maurice
    • 2
  • Jihad H. Kaouk
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.UrologyUrology Associates of NashvilleNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of UrologyCleveland ClinicClevelandUSA
  3. 3.Center for Robotic and Image Guide Surgery, Cleveland ClinicGlickman Urological and Kidney InstituteClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations