Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intraoperative Complications in Urologic Robotic Surgeries

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotic Urologic Surgery

  • 945 Accesses

Abstract

Robotic surgery has been evolving in the past 20 years with different models of robots, technologies, and surgical techniques. Several groups described the outcomes and advantages of this type of surgery compared to laparoscopy and open procedures. However, despite the robotic surgery evolution, this approach is not devoid of complications. This chapter describes in detail the most common complications associated with robotic urologic surgery according to the opinion of referral centers in this field.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. Covas Moschovas M, Helman T, Reddy S, Bhat S, Rogers TP, Sandri M, Noel J, Patel V. Minimally invasive lymphocele drainage using the da Vinci® single port platform: step-by-step technique of a prostate cancer referral center. J Endourol. 2021;35(9):1357–64. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2020.1175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Noël J, Moschovas MC, Sandri M, Bhat S, Rogers T, Reddy S, Corder C, Patel V. Patient surgical satisfaction after da Vinci® single-port and multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: propensity score-matched analysis. J Robot Surg. 2021;18:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-021-01269-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Moschovas MC, Timóteo F, Lins L, de Castro NO, Seetharam Bhat KR, Patel VR. Robotic surgery techniques to approach benign prostatic hyperplasia disease: a comprehensive literature review and the state of art. Asian J Urol. 2021 Jan;8(1):81–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2020.10.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Rogers T, Thiel D, Onol F, Roof S, Sighinolfi MC, Rocco B, Patel V. Applications of the da Vinci single port (SP) robotic platform in urology: a systematic literature review. Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2021;73(1):6–16. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03899-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Giedelman C, Covas Moschovas M, Bhat S, Brunelle L, Ogaya-Pinies G, Roof S, Corder C, Patel V, Palmer KJ. Establishing a successful robotic surgery program and improving operating room efficiency: literature review and our experience report. J Robot Surg. 2021;15(3):435–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01121-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Alemzadeh H, Raman J, Leveson N, Kalbarczyk Z, Iyer RK. Adverse events in robotic surgery: a retrospective study of 14 years of FDA data. PLoS One. 2016;11(4):e0151470. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151470.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Muaddi H, Hafid ME, Choi WJ, Lillie E, de Mestral C, Nathens A, Stukel TA, Karanicolas PJ. Clinical outcomes of robotic surgery compared to conventional surgical approaches (laparoscopic or open): a systematic overview of reviews. Ann Surg. 2021;273(3):467–73. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003915.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lavery HJ, Thaly R, Albala D, Ahlering T, Shalhav A, Lee D, Fagin R, Wiklund P, Dasgupta P, Costello AJ, Tewari A, Coughlin G, Patel VR. Robotic equipment malfunction during robotic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study. J Endourol. 2008;22(9):2165–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.0407. PMID: 18811574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Borden LS Jr, Kozlowski PM, Porter CR, Corman JM. Mechanical failure rate of da Vinci robotic system. Can J Urol. 2007;14(2):3499–501.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sundi D, Reese AC, Mettee LZ, Trock BJ, Pavlovich CP. Laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy outcomes in obese and extremely obese men. Urology. 2013;82(3):600–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.05.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Potretzke AM, Kim EH, Knight BA, Anderson BG, Park AM, Sherburne Figenshau R, Bhayani SB. Patient comorbidity predicts hospital length of stay after robot-assisted prostatectomy. J Robot Surg. 2016;10(2):151–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0588-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chitlik A. Safe positioning for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. AORN J. 2011 Jul;94(1):37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2011.02.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Barnett JC, Hurd WW, Rogers RM Jr, Williams NL, Shapiro SA. Laparoscopic positioning and nerve injuries. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007 Sep–Oct;14(5):664–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2007.04.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shveiky D, Aseff JN, Iglesia CB. Brachial plexus injury after laparoscopic and robotic surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(4):414–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2010.02.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sotelo RJ, Haese A, Machuca V, Medina L, Nunez L, Santinelli F, et al. Safer surgery by learning from complications: a focus on robotic prostate surgery. Eur Urol. 2016;69:334–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tourinho-Barbosa RR, Tobias-Machado M, Castro-Alfaro A, Ogaya-Pinies G, Cathelineau X, Sanchez-Salas R. Complications in robotic urological surgeries and how to avoid them: a systematic review. Arab J Urol. 2018;16(3):285–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2017.11.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Karaoren G, Bakan N, Kucuk EV, Gumus E. Is rhabdomyolysis an anaesthetic complication in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? J Minim Access Surg. 2017;13:29–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Sampat A, Parakati I, Kunnavakkam R, Glick DB, Lee NK, Tenney M, et al. Corneal abrasion in hysterectomy and prostatectomy: role of laparoscopic and robotic assistance. Anesthesiology. 2015;122:994–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gkegkes ID, Karydis A, Tyritzis SI, Iavazzo C. Ocular complications in robotic surgery. Int J Med Robot Comput. 2015;11:269–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kan KM, Brown SE, Gainsburg DM. Ocular complications in robotic-assisted prostatectomy: a review of pathophysiology and prevention. Minerva Anestesiol. 2015;81:557–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Putman SS, Bishoff JT. Visceral and gastrointestinal complications of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. In: Ghavamian R, editor. Complications of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 73–90.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Sutton PA, Awad S, Perkins AC, Lobo DN. Comparison of lateral thermal spread using monopolar and bipolar diathermy, the harmonic scalpel and the Ligasure. Br J Surg. 2010;97(3):428–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.6901.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Velilla G, Redondo C, Sánchez-Salas R, Rozet F, Cathelineau X. Visceral and gastrointestinal complications in robotic urologic surgery. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2018;42(2):77–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2016.12.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Canes D, Aron M, Nguyen MM, Winans C, Chand B, Gill IS. Common bile duct injury during urologic laparoscopy. J Endourol. 2008;22(7):1483–4. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.0351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hasson HM. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110(6):886–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(71)90593-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yee DS, Ornstein DK. Repair of rectal injury during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72(2):428–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dal Moro F, Crestani A, Valotto C, Guttilla A, Soncin R, Mangano A, Zattoni F. Anesthesiologic effects of transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal approach during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: results of a prospective randomized study. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41(3):466–72. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0199.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hong JY, Kim JY, Choi YD, Rha KH, Yoon SJ, Kil HK. Incidence of venous gas embolism during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is lower than that during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(6):777–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeq247.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lebowitz P, Yedlin A, Hakimi AA, Bryan-Brown C, Richards M, Ghavamian R. Respiratory gas exchange during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth. 2015;27(6):470–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2015.06.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ahmad G, Gent D, Henderson D, O’Flynn H, Phillips K, Watson A. Laparoscopic entry techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2:CD006583. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Horovitz D, Feng C, Messing EM, Joseph JV. Extraperitoneal vs transperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the setting of prior abdominal or pelvic surgery. J Endourol. 2017;31:366–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wedmid A, Mendoza P, Sharma S, Hastings RL, Monahan KP, Walicki M, Ahlering TE, Porter J, Castle EP, Ahmed F, Engel JD, Frazier HA 2nd, Eun D, Lee DI. Rectal injury during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: incidence and management. J Urol. 2011;186(5):1928–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Guiote I, Gaya JM, Gausa L, Rodríguez O, Palou J. Complications from robot-assisted radical cystectomy: where do we stand? Actas Urol Esp. 2016;40(2):108–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2015.03.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mandel P, Linnemannstöns A, Chun F, Schlomm T, Pompe R, Budäus L, Rosenbaum C, Ludwig T, Dahlem R, Fisch M, Graefen M, Huland H, Tilki D, Steuber T. Incidence, risk factors, management, and complications of rectal injuries during radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4(4):554–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2017.01.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ou YC, Yang CR, Wang J, Yang CK, Cheng CL, Patel VR, Tewari AK. The learning curve for reducing complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon. BJU Int. 2011;108(3):420–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09847.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Canda AE, Tilki D, Mottrie A. Rectal injury during radical prostatectomy: focus on robotic surgery. Eur Urol Oncol. 2018;1(6):507–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2018.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kheterpal E, Bhandari A, Siddiqui S, Pokala N, Peabody J, Menon M. Management of rectal injury during robotic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2011;77(4):976–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.11.045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Simms MS, Terry TR. Well leg compartment syndrome after pelvic and perineal surgery in the lithotomy position. Postgrad Med J. 2005;81(958):534–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.2004.030965.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Andrews LW. Neurovascular assessment. Adv Clin Care. 1990;5(6):5–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Frink M, Hildebrand F, Krettek C, Brand J, Hankemeier S. Compartment syndrome of the lower leg and foot. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(4):940–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0891-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Nilsson A, Alkner B, Wetterlöv P, Wetterstad S, Palm L, Schilcher J. Low compartment pressure and myoglobin levels in tibial fractures with suspected acute compartment syndrome. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20(1):15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-2394-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Zutt R, van der Kooi AJ, Linthorst GE, Wanders RJ, de Visser M. Rhabdomyolysis: review of the literature. Neuromuscul Disord. 2014;24(8):651–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nmd.2014.05.005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Tillinghast CM, Gary JL. Compartment syndrome of the lower extremity. In: Mauffrey C, Hak DJ, Martin III MP, editors. Compartment syndrome: a guide to diagnosis and management [internet]. Cham: Springer; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Gelder C, McCallum AL, Macfarlane AJR, Anderson JH. A systematic review of mechanical thromboprophylaxis in the lithotomy position. Surgeon. 2018;16(6):365–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2018.03.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tobias-Machado M, Moschovas MC. Inguinal lymphadenectomy. In: Sotelo R, Arriaga J, Aron M, editors. Complications in robotic urologic surgery. Cham: Springer; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62277-4_32.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AdventHealth Global Robotics Institute, Celebration, FL, USA

    Marcio Covas Moschovas

  2. Galway Clinic, Galway, Ireland

    Marta Anton-Juanilla & David Bouchier-Hayes

  3. University of Central Florida, UCF, Orlando, USA

    Marcio Covas Moschovas

Authors
  1. Marcio Covas Moschovas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marta Anton-Juanilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Bouchier-Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA

    Peter Wiklund

  2. Department of Urology, ORSI Academy, Aalst, Belgium

    Alexandre Mottrie

  3. Pediatric Urology, University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences, Chicago, IL, USA

    Mohan S Gundeti

  4. Urology, Global Robotics Institute, Celebration, FL, USA

    Vipul Patel

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

Moschovas, M.C., Anton-Juanilla, M., Bouchier-Hayes, D. (2022). Intraoperative Complications in Urologic Robotic Surgeries. 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_51

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_51

  • 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

Search

Navigation