Attention: Restrictions on use of AUA, AUAER, and UCF content in third party applications, including artificial intelligence technologies, such as large language models and generative AI.
You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.

UPJ INSIGHT: Single-port Versus Multi-port Robotic-assisted Procedures From the Patient's Perspective: A Retrospective Cohort Study

By: Luca A. Morgantini, MD; Matthew Del Pino, MD; Arthi Bharadwaj; Ahmad Alzein; Ashwin Ganesh; Erin Egan; Francesco Del Giudice, MD; Simone Crivellaro, MD | Posted on: 01 Nov 2022

Morgantini LA, Del Pino M, Bharadwaj A, et al. Single-port versus multi-port robotic-assisted procedures from the patient’s perspective: a retrospective cohort study. Urol Pract. 2022;10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000340.

Figure. Boxplot graph showing distribution of the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ): scores, time passed from surgery to survey completion, and length of hospital stay among multi-port (MP) and single-port (SP) procedure types. Asterisk indicates P < .05; double asterisk, P < .01; ns, not statistically significant.

Study Need and Importance

The da Vinci SP® single-port system, differently from prior platforms, utilizes a single 2.5 cm incision accommodating 1 flexible camera and 3 articulated robotic arms. Potential advantages of this platform include shorter hospitalization, improved cosmesis, and reduced postoperative pain. This project investigates the impact of the novel SP system on cosmetic and psychometric patient assessment.

What We Found

Using the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (a validated patient-reported outcomes measure for surgical scar), we contacted patients to assess 4 domains–Appearance, Consciousness, Satisfaction With Appearance, and Satisfaction With Symptoms–regarding their surgical scars. Compared to 78 da Vinci Xi® procedure recipients (mean 15.28), 104 SP procedure recipients (mean 13.84) reported significantly better cosmetic scar appearance (P = .007). Similarly, the SP cohort (mean 8.80) compared to the Xi group (mean 9.87) demonstrated significantly better consciousness of their surgical scar (P = .045) and higher satisfaction with the cosmetic appearance of their surgical scar (P = .022), with the SP group (mean 11.35) attaining better scores than the Xi group (mean 12.54; see Figure). No significant difference was found for “Satisfaction With Symptoms” (P = .88).

Limitations

First, our study was conducted over the phone, and researchers were not blinded to surgery type, potentially driving observer bias. Insignificant findings in the Satisfaction With Symptoms domain do decrease the likelihood that our results were affected by observer bias, as this would be expected to affect all domains. Second, telephone-administered interviews may be seen as a limitation; however, it has been shown that there is little difference between the telephone and face-to-face modes of interview.

Interpretation for Patient Care

Our study demonstrates patients’ favorable reception of SP versus Xi surgery in terms of aesthetic outcomes. An ongoing study is investigating the relationship between cosmetic satisfaction and length of stay, postoperative pain, and narcotic use.

advertisement

advertisement