Analysis Study of Outcomes Robotic-Assisted Surgery is Compared to Minimally Invasive Surgery in Pediatric Urology: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Study
Keywords:
Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), minimally invasive surgery, pediatric, urologyAbstract
Background: The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has increased more slowly in pediatrics than in the adult population. Despite the many advantages of robotic instruments, such as the ability to mimic the movements of the human wrist, highly magnified 3D visualization, and tremor filtration, the da Vinci Surgical System still presents some limitations for use in pediatric surgery. Method: This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted following PRISMA guidelines and employing the PICO format, aim to explore about the analysis study of outcomes robotic-assisted surgery is compared to minimally invasive surgery in pediatric urology. Inclusion criteria encompass diverse study designs (RCTs, observational, quasi-experimental, and case-control studies) investigating the analysis study of outcomes robotic-assisted surgery is compared to minimally invasive surgery in pediatric urology, while exclusion criteria filter out studies lacking relevance to the analysis study of outcomes robotic-assisted surgery is compared to minimally invasive surgery in pediatric urology. Result: The selected articles, demonstrate a recent publication trend, with 2 are articles published in PubMed journal, 5 were published in Sage Journal, 1 were published in Lancet, 4 were published in Science Direct from 2014 – 2024. Based on the Z value of 12.79 and P value <0.00001, there is a significant comparison between robotic-assisted surgery and minimally invasive surgery. The fixed random value is 0.37, where the value here is positive. Conclusion: Robotic procedures in paediatric surgery are increasingly reported. Financial restrictions in many public health markets will likely demonstrate a reduced growth. Over the next decade, the introduction of new, more affordable robotic platforms is likely to alter this.
References
Mei H, Tang S. Robotic-assisted surgery in the pediatric surgeons’ world: Current situation and future prospectives. Front Pediatr. 2023;11(February):1–7.
Fuchs ME, DaJusta DG. Robotics in pediatric urology. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;46(3):322–7.
Krebs TF, Schnorr I, Heye P, Häcker FM. Robotically Assisted Surgery in Children—A Perspective. Children. 2022;9(6).
Clarke S. Paediatric robotic surgery and urology: where are we? J Pediatr Endosc Surg [Internet]. 2019;1(2):49–52. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42804-019-00008-x
Boscarelli A, Giglione E, Caputo MR, Guida E, Iaquinto M, Scarpa MG, et al. Robotic-assisted surgery in pediatrics: what is evidence-based?—a literature review. Transl Pediatr. 2023;12(2):271–9.
Hou S, Xing M, Gundeti M. Pediatric robotic urologic procedures: Indications and outcomes. Indian J Urol. 2023;39(2):107–20.
GOOD G. 済無No Title No Title No Title. Angew Chemie Int Ed 6(11), 951–952. 2015;1(April).
Denning NL, Kallis MP, Prince JM. Pediatric Robotic Surgery. Surg Clin North Am [Internet]. 2020;100(2):431–43. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2019.12.004
Bhattu AS, Ganpule A, Sabnis RB, Murali V, Mishra S, Desai M. Robot-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy vs standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A prospective randomized comparative study. J Endourol. 2015;29(12):1334–40.
Khan MS, Gan C, Ahmed K, Ismail AF, Watkins J, Summers JA, et al. A single-centre early phase randomised controlled three-arm trial of open, Robotic, and Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol [Internet]. 2016;69(4):613–21. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.038
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Pääkkö E, Biancari F, Ohtonen P, Mäkelä J. Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external or internal rectal prolapse and enterocele: a randomized controlled trial. Color Dis. 2016;18(10):1010–5.
Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer the rolarr randomized clinical trial. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2017;318(16):1569–80.
Liao G, Zhao Z, Lin S, Li R, Yuan Y, Du S, et al. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;12(1):1–11.
Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, Smith B, Stroupe K, Rosenman A, et al. Robotic Compared With Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2014 Jan;123(1):5–12. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/00006250-201401000-00003
Broholm M, Hansen IO, Rosenberg J. Limited evidence for robot-assisted surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech. 2016;26(2):117–23.
Roh HF, Nam SH, Kim JM. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):1–12.
Andolfi C, Patel D, Rodriguez VM, Gundeti MS. Impact and outcomes of a pediatric robotic urology mini-fellowship. Front Surg. 2019;6(April):1–5.
Fernandez N, Farhat WA. A comprehensive analysis of robot-assisted surgery uptake in the pediatric surgical discipline. Front Surg. 2019;6(March):1–8.
Raymond SL, Sharafeddin F, Sacks MA, Srikureja D, Gomez N, Moores D, et al. Establishment of a successful robotic pediatric general surgery practice. J Robot Surg [Internet]. 2023;17(5):2427–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01667-y
Steffens D, McBride KE, Hirst N, Solomon MJ, Anderson T, Thanigasalam R, et al. Surgical outcomes and cost analysis of a multi-specialty robotic-assisted surgery caseload in the Australian public health system. J Robot Surg [Internet]. 2023;17(5):2237–45. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01643-6
Chen CJ, Peters CA. Robotic assisted surgery in pediatric urology: Current status and future directions. Front Pediatr. 2019;7(MAR):1–5.
Howe A, Kozel Z, Palmer L. Robotic surgery in pediatric urology. Asian J Urol [Internet]. 2017;4(1):55–67. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2016.06.002
Salkini MW. Robotic surgery in pediatric urology. Urol Ann. 2022;14(4):314–6.
Saxena AK, Borgogni R, Escolino M, D’Auria D, Esposito C. Narrative review: robotic pediatric surgery-current status and future perspectives. Transl Pediatr. 2023;12(10):1875–86.
Tesoro S, Gamba P, Bertozzi M, Borgogni R, Caramelli F, Cobellis G, et al. Pediatric robotic surgery: issues in management—expert consensus from the Italian Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SARNePI) and the Italian Society of Pediatric Surgery (SICP). Surg Endosc [Internet]. 2022;36(11):7877–97. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09577-0
O’Brien LP, Hannan E, Antao B, Peirce C. Paediatric robotic surgery: a narrative review. J Robot Surg [Internet]. 2023;17(4):1171–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01523-z
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Tegar Pamungkas, John M.Sangkai (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing here keep copyright but grant the journal first publication rights, under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License. They can distribute their work non-exclusively elsewhere with an acknowledgment of its first publication in this journal. Posting the work online before and during submission for earlier and greater citation is encouraged, reflecting Open Access benefits.
