Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgeries: Current Use in Pediatric Urology Patients
Keywords:
Pediatric urology, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries (RALS), pyeloplasty, ureteral reimplantation, heminephrectomy, lower urinary tract reconstructionAbstract
Introduction: The use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgeries (RALS) has largely increased in recent years, offering faster and safer treatment options for pediatric patients. In the field of urology, RALS has shown a significant advantage over laparoscopic and open surgeries but continues to be controversial in pediatric cases due to limited comprehensive data on its use.
Methods: In this review, we aim to summarize the factors associated with RALS use in pediatric cases involving pyeloplasty, ureteral reimplantation, heminephrectomy, and lower urinary tract reconstruction. We used PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to systematically search for literature on the topic. We then critically assessed and compiled data on RALS outcomes, complications, and associated factors.
Results: To date, numerous comparative studies have been conducted on pediatric RALS, with only one randomized control trial investigating the nuances of robotic use against standard of care treatments. These robotic approaches have shown promise in post-surgical outcomes for pediatric patients undergoing upper and lower urinary tract reconstruction. Barriers to use still persist, however, showcasing a need to increase access to the technology, refine instruments for pediatric use, address cost barriers, and provide proper training for surgeons.
Conclusion: RALS provides an opportunity to improve pediatric patient outcomes for numerous urologic complications. Additional studies are required to better compare the use of RALS with current standard practices. Due to the difficult nature of conducting randomized control trials, additional prospective observational studies are needed.
References
Denning, N.-L., Kallis, M. P. & Prince, J. M. Pediatric Robotic Surgery. Surgical Clinics of North America 100, 431–443 (2020).
Andolfi, C., Kumar, R., Boysen, W. R. & Gundeti, M. S. Current Status of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 29, 159–166 (2019).
Wirth, G. J. et al. [Robot-assisted surgery in urology]. Urologe A 47, 960–963 (2008).
Mizuno, K. et al. Robotic surgery in pediatric urology: Current status. Asian J Endosc Surg 11, 308–317 (2018).
Navaratnam, A., Abdul-Muhsin, H. & Humphreys, M. Updates in Urologic Robot Assisted Surgery. F1000Res 7, F1000 Faculty Rev-1948 (2018).
Paraiso, M. & Falcone, T. Robot-assisted laparoscopy. 2020.
Trevisani, L. F. M. & Nguyen, H. T. Current controversies in pediatric urologic robotic surgery. Curr Opin Urol 23, 72–77 (2013).
Fuchs, M. E. & DaJusta, D. G. Robotics in Pediatric Urology. Int Braz J Urol 46, 322–327 (2020).
Howe, A., Kozel, Z. & Palmer, L. Robotic surgery in pediatric urology. Asian J Urol 4, 55–67 (2017).
Andolfi, C., Rodríguez, V. M., Galansky, L. & Gundeti, M. S. Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success. Eur Urol 80, 621–631 (2021).
Bruns, N. E., Soldes, O. S. & Ponsky, T. A. Robotic Surgery may Not ‘Make the Cut’ in Pediatrics. Front Pediatr 3, 10 (2015).
Sheth, K. R. & Koh, C. J. The Future of Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology: Upcoming Technology and Evolution Within the Field. Front Pediatr 7, 259 (2019).
Hsu, R. L., Kaye, A. D. & Urman, R. D. Anesthetic Challenges in Robotic-assisted Urologic Surgery. Rev Urol 15, 178–184 (2013).
Muneer, A. et al. Current status of robotic surgery in pediatric urology. Pediatr Surg Int 24, 973 (2008).
Albqami, N. & Janetschek, G. Pyéloplastie laparoscopique. Annales d’Urologie 40, 363–367 (2006).
Cundy, T. P. et al. Meta-analysis of robot-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children. BJU International 114, 582–594 (2014).
Greenwald, D., Mohanty, A., Andolfi, C. & Gundeti, M. S. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pediatric Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty. Journal of Endourology 36, 448–461 (2022).
Dangle, P. P., Kearns, J., Anderson, B. & Gundeti, M. S. Outcomes of infants undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty compared to open repair. J Urol 190, 2221–2226 (2013).
Pascual-Piédrola, J. I. et al. [Robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty.]. Arch Esp Urol 70, 454–461 (2017).
Kumar, S. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: A retrospective case series review. J Minim Access Surg 17, 202–207 (2021).
Wong, Y. S., Pang, K. K. Y. & Tam, Y. H. Comparing Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty vs. Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Infants Aged 12 Months or Less. Front Pediatr 9, 647139 (2021).
Andolfi, C., Adamic, B., Oommen, J. & Gundeti, M. S. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and children: is it superior to conventional laparoscopy? World J Urol 38, 1827–1833 (2020).
Murthy, P., Cohn, J. A. & Gundeti, M. S. Evaluation of robotic-assisted laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children: single-surgeon experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 97, 109–114 (2015).
Chandrasekharam, V. V. S. & Babu, R. A systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants. Journal of Pediatric Urology 17, 502–510 (2021).
Silay, M. S., Danacioglu, O., Ozel, K., Karaman, M. I. & Caskurlu, T. Laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: preliminary results of a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial. World J Urol 38, 1841–1848 (2020).
Spampinato, G. et al. Comparison of the Learning Curve for Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty Between Senior and Junior Surgeons. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques 31, 478–483 (2021).
Kassite, I., Braik, K., Villemagne, T., Lardy, H. & Binet, A. The learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: a multi-outcome approach. J Pediatr Urol 14, 570.e1-570.e10 (2018).
Dothan, D., Raisin, G., Jaber, J., Kocherov, S. & Chertin, B. Learning curve of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) in children: how to reach a level of excellence? J Robot Surg 15, 93–97 (2021).
Bennett, W. E. et al. Validated cost comparison of open vs. robotic pyeloplasty in American children’s hospitals. J Robot Surg 11, 201–206 (2017).
Passoni, N. & Peters, C. A. Robotic Ureteral Reimplantation. J Endourol 34, S31–S34 (2020).
Peters, C. A. Robotically assisted surgery in pediatric urology. Urol Clin North Am 31, 743–752 (2004).
Mellin, P. & Eickenberg, H.-U. Ureteral reimplantation: Lich-Grégoire method. Urology 11, 315 (1978).
Esposito, C. et al. Robotics and future technical developments in pediatric urology. Semin Pediatr Surg 30, 151082 (2021).
Gundeti, M. S., Boysen, W. R. & Shah, A. Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Extravesical Ureteral Reimplantation: Technique Modifications Contribute to Optimized Outcomes. Eur Urol 70, 818–823 (2016).
Carbonara, U. et al. Robot-Assisted Ureteral Reimplantation: A Single-Center Comparative Study. J Endourol 35, 1504–1511 (2021).
Koehne, E., Desai, S. & Lindgren, B. Robot-assisted laparoscopic diverticulectomy with ureteral reimplantation. Journal of Pediatric Urology 16, 508–509 (2020).
Boysen, W. R. et al. Prospective multicenter study on robot-assisted laparoscopic extravesical ureteral reimplantation (RALUR-EV): Outcomes and complications. Journal of Pediatric Urology 14, 262.e1-262.e6 (2018).
Bowen, D. K. et al. Use of Pediatric Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ureteral Reimplantation in the United States: 2000 to 2012. J Urol 196, 207–212 (2016).
Elizondo, R. A. et al. Open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation: Hospital charges analysis and outcomes at a single institution. J Pediatr Surg S0022-3468(19)30901–7 (2020) doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.12.016.
Herz, D. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic management of duplex renal anomaly: Comparison of surgical outcomes to traditional pure laparoscopic and open surgery. Journal of Pediatric Urology 12, 44.e1-44.e7 (2016).
Jayram, G. et al. Outcomes and fate of the remnant moiety following laparoscopic heminephrectomy for duplex kidney: A multicenter review. Journal of Pediatric Urology 7, 272–275 (2011).
Leclair, M.-D., Vidal, I., Suply, E., Podevin, G. & Héloury, Y. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic heminephrectomy in duplex kidney in infants and children: a 15-year experience. Eur Urol 56, 385–389 (2009).
Zeuschner, P. et al. Open versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: A longitudinal comparison of 880 patients over 10 years. Int J Med Robot 17, 1–8 (2021).
Malik, R. D., Pariser, J. J. & Gundeti, M. S. Outcomes in Pediatric Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Heminephrectomy Compared with Contemporary Open and Laparoscopic Series. J Endourol 29, 1346–1352 (2015).
Ballouhey, Q. et al. Partial nephrectomy for small children: Robot-assisted versus open surgery. International Journal of Urology 24, 855–860 (2017).
Buse, S. et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of robot-assisted vs. open partial nephrectomy. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery 14, e1920 (2018).
Mir, S. A., Cadeddu, J. A., Sleeper, J. P. & Lotan, Y. Cost Comparison of Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Partial Nephrectomy. Journal of Endourology 25, 447–453 (2011).
Laydner, H. et al. Single institutional cost analysis of 325 robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies. Urology 81, 533–538 (2013).
Varda, B. K., Rajender, A., Yu, R. N. & Lee, R. S. A contemporary single-institution retrospective cohort study comparing perioperative outcomes between robotic and open partial nephrectomy for poorly functioning renal moieties in children with duplex collecting systems. J Pediatr Urol 14, 549.e1-549.e8 (2018).
Taghavi, K. et al. Complication profile of augmentation cystoplasty in contemporary paediatric urology: a 20-year review. ANZ Journal of Surgery 91, 1005–1010 (2021).
M, L. et al. [Appendicovesicostomy (Mitrofanoff procedure) in children: Long-term follow-up and specific complications]. Progres en urologie : journal de l’Association francaise d’urologie et de la Societe francaise d’urologie 28, (2018).
Gundeti, M. S., Acharya, S. S., Zagaja, G. P. & Shalhav, A. L. Paediatric robotic-assisted laparoscopic augmentation ileocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy (RALIMA): feasibility of and initial experience with the University of Chicago technique. BJU International 107, 962–969 (2011).
Adamic, B. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic augmentation ileocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy in children: Step-by-step and modifications to UChicago technique. BJUI Compass 1, 32–40 (2020).
Rodriguez, M. V., Wallace, A. & Gundeti, M. S. Robotic Bladder Neck Reconstruction With Mitrofanoff Appendicovesicostomy in a Neurogenic Bladder Patient. Urology 137, 206–207 (2020).
Famakinwa, O. & Gundeti, M. S. Robotic assisted laparoscopic Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy (RALMA). Curr Urol Rep 14, 41–45 (2013).
Famakinwa, O. J., Rosen, A. M. & Gundeti, M. S. Robot-assisted laparoscopic Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy technique and outcomes of extravesical and intravesical approaches. Eur Urol 64, 831–836 (2013).
Chung, P. H., De, S. & Gargollo, P. C. Robotic appendicovesicostomy revision in children: description of technique and initial results. J Endourol 29, 271–275 (2015).
Juul, N. et al. Robot-Assisted vs. Open Appendicovesicostomy in Pediatric Urology: A Systematic Review and Single-Center Case Series. Front Pediatr 10, 908554 (2022).
Murthy, P., Cohn, J. A., Selig, R. B. & Gundeti, M. S. Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Augmentation Ileocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff Appendicovesicostomy in Children: Updated Interim Results. European Urology 68, 1069–1075 (2015).
Gargollo, P. C. & White, L. A. Robotic-Assisted Bladder Neck Procedures for Incontinence in Pediatric Patients. Front Pediatr 7, 172 (2019).
Grimsby, G. M., Jacobs, M. A., Menon, V., Schlomer, B. J. & Gargollo, P. C. Perioperative and Short-Term Outcomes of Robotic vs Open Bladder Neck Procedures for Neurogenic Incontinence. J Urol 195, 1088–1092 (2016).
Andolfi, C., Patel, D., Rodriguez, V. M. & Gundeti, M. S. Impact and Outcomes of a Pediatric Robotic Urology Mini-Fellowship. Front Surg 6, 22 (2019).
O’Kelly, F., Farhat, W. A. & Koyle, M. A. Cost, training and simulation models for robotic-assisted surgery in pediatric urology. World J Urol 38, 1875–1882 (2020).
Gottlieb, S. Surgeons perform transatlantic operation using fibreoptics. BMJ 323, 713 (2001).
Marescaux, J. et al. Transcontinental Robot-Assisted Remote Telesurgery: Feasibility and Potential Applications. Ann Surg 235, 487–492 (2002).
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Bombay Hospital Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
