Skip to main content

Port Placement for Robotic Renal Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotic Urologic Surgery

Abstract

Beyond the skills of the surgeon, the key to the success of a robot-assisted laparoscopic procedure is good patient positioning and proper port placement. An optimal port placement is necessary to access the targeted organ at best, to avoid patient injury due to the bulky nature of the robot, to minimize collision arm to arm, and to minimize intraoperative range-of-motion limits. Regarding renal surgery, the kidney robot-assisted transperitoneal approach has gradually taken the place of standard laparoscopy. However, the retroperitoneal approach is increasingly used, particularly for posterior or lateral renal tumors. Regardless of the approach, the positioning of the trocars for kidney surgery depends on the robotic device (Si, X, or Xi da Vinci® surgical system), the patient’s morphology, the location of the tumor, and the preferences of the surgeon. In principle, four 8-mm da Vinci trocars are used, with a 12-mm assisting port and sometimes a second 5-mm assisting port. It is recommended to insert all the ports carefully under direct visual control.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Merety KS, Darcy MD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(19):1370–1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kallingal GJS, Swain S, Darwiche F, Punnen S, Manoharan M, Gonzalgo ML, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy with the Da Vinci Xi. Adv Urol. 2016;2016:9675095.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Mikhail D, Sarcona J, Mekhail M, Richstone L. Urologic robotic surgery. Surg Clin N Am. 2020;100(2):361–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Durand X, Molimard B, Bayoud Y. Néphrectomie partielle par voie laparoscopique robot-assistée transpéritonéale. EMC – Techniques chirurgicales – Urologie. 2014;7(4):1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mittakanti HR, Heulitt G, Li H-F, Porter JR. Transperitoneal vs. retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a matched-paired analysis. World J Urol. 2020;38(5):1093–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Patel M, Porter J. Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2013;31(6):1377–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. M P, J P. Robotic retroperitoneal surgery: a contemporary review. Current opinion in urology [Internet]. janv 2013 [cité 18 juin 2021];23(1). Disponible sur: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23159992/

  8. Hemal AK, Goldberg H. NARUS 2019: port placement principles for Xi and Si robots. 3rd Annual North American Robotic Urology Symposium (NARUS). 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pathak RA, Patel M, Hemal AK. Comprehensive approach to port placement templates for robot-assisted laparoscopic urologic surgeries. J Endourol. 2017;31(12):1269–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ljungberg B, Hanbury DC, Kuczyk MA, Merseburger AS, Mulders PFA, Patard J-J, et al. Renal cell carcinoma guideline. Eur Urol. 2007;51(6):1502–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Aron M, Gill IS. Minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery (MINSS) for renal tumours part I: laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2007;51(2):337–46; discussion 46–47.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Singh I. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: current review of the technique and literature. J Minim Access Surg. 2009;5(4):87–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Atalla MA, Dovey Z, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic versus robotic pyeloplasty: man versus machine. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2010;7(1):27–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Casale P, Lughezzani G, Buffi N, Larcher A, Porter J, Mottrie A, et al. Evolution of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: techniques and outcomes from the transatlantic robotic nephron-sparing surgery study group. Eur Urol. 2019;76(2):222–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stolzenburg J-U, Türk IA, Liatsikos EN, éditeurs. Laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery in urology: Atlas of standard procedures. Berlin: Springer; 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG, Porter JR, Buffi NM, Figenshau RS, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: an international experience. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):815–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sammon JD, Karakiewicz PI, Sun M, Ravi P, Ghani KR, Jeong W, et al. Robot-assisted vs. laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: utilization rates and perioperative outcomes. Int Braz J Urol. 2013;39(3):377–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wright JL, Porter JR. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. J Urol. 2005;174(3):841–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hu JC, Treat E, Filson CP, McLaren I, Xiong S, Stepanian S, et al. Technique and outcomes of robot-assisted retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter study. Eur Urol. 2014;66(3):542–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Xia L, Zhang X, Wang X, Xu T, Qin L, Zhang X, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2016;30:109–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim EH, Larson JA, Potretzke AM, Hulsey NK, Bhayani SB, Figenshau RS. Retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for posterior renal masses is associated with earlier hospital discharge: a single-institution retrospective comparison. J Endourol. 2015;29(10):1137–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Choo SH, Lee SY, Sung HH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Jeon SS, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: matched-pair comparisons by nephrometry scores. World J Urol. 2014;32(6):1523–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hughes-Hallett A, Patki P, Patel N, Barber NJ, Sullivan M, Thilagarajah R. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparison of the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. J Endourol. 2013;27(7):869–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Maurice MJ, Kaouk JH, Ramirez D, Bhayani SB, Allaf ME, Rogers CG, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy for posterior tumors through a retroperitoneal approach offers decreased length of stay compared with the transperitoneal approach: a propensity-matched analysis. J Endourol. 2017;31(2):158–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tanaka K, Shigemura K, Furukawa J, Ishimura T, Muramaki M, Miyake H, et al. Comparison of the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approach in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in an initial case series in Japan. J Endourol. 2013;27(11):1384–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang WC, Levey AS, Serio AM, Snyder M, Vickers AJ, Raj GV, et al. Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7(9):735–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim SP, Murad MH, Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, Weight CJ, Han LC, et al. Comparative effectiveness for survival and renal function of partial and radical nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol. 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fan X, Xu K, Lin T, Liu H, Yin Z, Dong W, et al. Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2013;111(4):611–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Xia L, Talwar R, Taylor BL, Shin MH, Berger IB, Sperling CD, et al. National trends and disparities of minimally invasive surgery for localized renal cancer, 2010 to 2015. Urol Oncol. 2019;37(3):182.e17–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vaessen, C., Grobet-Jeandin, E., Stolzenburg, JU., Arthanareeswaran, VKA., Porter, J. (2022). Port Placement for Robotic Renal Surgery. In: Wiklund, P., Mottrie, A., Gundeti, M.S., Patel, V. (eds) Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_37

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-00362-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-00363-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics