World J Urol. 2024 Jan 10;42(1):18. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04711-6.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Comparing the safety and efficacy of single-port (SP) versus multi-port (MP) robotic-assisted techniques in urological surgeries.
METHODS: A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA criteria for primary outcomes of interest, and quality assessment followed AMSTAR. Four databases were systematically searched: Embase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The search time range is from database creation to December 2022. Stata16 was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: There were 17 studies involving 5015 patients. In urological surgeries, single-port robotics had shorter length of stay (WMD = – 0.63, 95% Cl [- 1.06, – 0.21], P < 0.05), less estimated blood loss (WMD = – 19.56, 95% Cl [- 32.21, – 6.91], P < 0.05), less lymph node yields (WMD = – 3.35, 95% Cl [- 5.16, – 1.55], P < 0.05), less postoperative opioid use (WMD = – 5.86, 95% Cl [- 8.83, – 2.88], P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time, positive margins rate, overall complications rate, and major complications rate.
CONCLUSION: Single-port robotics appears to have similar perioperative outcomes to multi-port robotics in urological surgery. In radical prostatectomy, single-port robotics has shown some advantages, but the specific suitability of single-port robots for urological surgical types needs to be further explored.
PMID:38197961 | DOI:10.1007/s00345-023-04711-6
