Robotic surgery has improved the oncologic and functional outcomes of many urologic oncology procedures by optimizing visualization and instrument maneuverability. Since its FDA approval in 2018, the daVinci single-port (SP) platform has become increasingly utilized in urologic oncology, with its theoretical advantages over the standard multiport (MP) platform including improved cosmesis, reduced pain, and shorter hospitalization. Given this platform’s relative novelty, comparisons between SP and MP robotic surgeries in urologic oncology tend to be small, non-randomized studies performed at centers of excellence. We review the existing literature comparing oncologic and functional outcomes between SP and MP surgeries to treat prostate, kidney, and bladder cancer.
Methods:
A literature review was performed in PubMed for studies comparing SP and MP prostatectomies, nephrectomies, and cystectomies from 2018 to 2024. The search was limited to English studies. Studies evaluating prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy for nononcologic indications were excluded.
Results:
No difference in margin status or recurrence was definitively demonstrated between SP and MP radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy, or radical cystectomy. No clear difference in operative time, blood loss, or complication rates between SP and MP surgery was found. SP surgery may improve length of stay, pain, and satisfaction with incisions compared with MP surgery, though these differences were not robustly demonstrated across all studies. Key functional outcomes, such as change in kidney function in partial nephrectomy, and erectile/urinary function in radical prostatectomy, were similar between the SP and MP platforms.
Conclusion:
Based on current evidence from experienced surgeons at centers of excellence, the daVinci SP platform allows urologists to perform common oncologic procedures safely and effectively. Currently, no data definitively establishes improved oncologic or functional outcomes for SP surgery over MP surgery, though improved hospital stay and cosmesis are identified as theoretical benefits of an SP procedure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SoodA, JeongW, PeabodyJO, et al.Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Inching toward gold standard. Urol Clin North Am, 2014; 41(4):473–484; doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2014.07.002
2.
BenwayBM, BhayaniSB, RogersCG, et al.Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: A multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol, 2009; 182(3):866–872; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.05.037
3.
LaneBR, GillIS. 7-year oncological outcomes after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. J Urol, 2010; 183(2):473–479; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.023
4.
RazdanS, BadaniK. Robotic Radical Nephrectomy: Every Revolution Seems Impossible at the Beginning, and After It Happens, It Was Inevitable. J Endourol, 2022; 36(3):287–288; doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0882
5.
CrocerossaF, CarbonaraU, CantielloF, et al.Robot-assisted Radical Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies. Eur Urol, 2021; 80(4):428–439; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.10.034
6.
GargH, PsutkaSP, HakimiAA, et al.A Decade of Robotic-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy with Inferior Vena Cava Thrombectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes. J Urol, 2022; 208(3):542–560; doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002829
7.
ParekhDJ, ReisIM, CastleEP, et al.Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer (RAZOR): An open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet, 2018; 391(10139):2525–2536; doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30996-6
8.
VenkatramaniV, ReisIM, CastleEP, et al.Predictors of Recurrence, and Progression-Free and Overall Survival following Open versus Robotic Radical Cystectomy: Analysis from the RAZOR Trial with a 3-Year Followup. J Urol, 2020; 203(3):522–529; doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000565
9.
BecerraMF, VenkatramaniV, ReisIM, et al.Health Related Quality of Life of Patients with Bladder Cancer in the RAZOR Trial: A Multi-Institutional Randomized Trial Comparing Robot versus Open Radical Cystectomy. J Urol, 2020; 204(3):450–459; doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001029
10.
KaoukJH, GoelRK, HaberG-P, et al.Robotic single-port transumbilical surgery in humans: Initial report. BJU Int, 2009; 103(3):366–369; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07949.x
11.
ParkSK, OlwenyEO, BestSL, et al.Patient-reported body image and cosmesis outcomes following kidney surgery: Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site, laparoscopic, and open surgery. Eur Urol, 2011; 60(5):1097–1104; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.08.007
12.
ShinTY, LimSK, KomninosC, et al.Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) reduces postoperative wound pain without a rise in complication rates. BJU Int, 2014; 114(4):555–561; doi: 10.1111/bju.12783
13.
DobbsRW, HalgrimsonWR, TalaminiS, et al.Single-port robotic surgery: The next generation of minimally invasive urology. World J Urol, 2020; 38(4):897–905; doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02898-1
14.
MenonM, HemalAK, VIP Team. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: A technique of robotic radical prostatectomy: Experience in more than 1000 cases. J Endourol, 2004; 18(7):611–619; discussion 619; doi: 10.1089/end.2004.18.611
15.
LantzA, BockD, AkreO, et al.Functional and Oncological Outcomes After Open Versus Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localised Prostate Cancer: 8-Year Follow-up. Eur Urol, 2021; 80(5):650–660; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.07.025
16.
SoodA, GrauerR, Diaz-InsuaM, et al.15-year biochemical failure, metastasis, salvage therapy, and cancer-specific and overall survival rates in men treated with robotic radical prostatectomy for PSA-screen detected prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023; 26(4):778–786; doi: 10.1038/s41391-023-00674-2
17.
KaoukJ, BertoloR, EltemamyM, et al.Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: First Clinical Experience Using The SP Surgical System. Urology, 2019; 124:309; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.10.025
18.
VigneswaranHT, SchwarzmanLS, FrancavillaS, et al.A Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Single-port and Multiport Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2020; 77(6):671–674; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.031
19.
SaidianA, FangAM, HakimO, et al.Perioperative Outcomes of Single vs Multi-Port Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Single Institutional Experience. J Urol, 2020; 204(3):490–495; doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000811
20.
HuangMM, PatelHD, WaingerJJ, et al.Comparison of Perioperative and Pathologic Outcomes Between Single-port and Standard Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: An Analysis of a High-volume Center and the Pooled World Experience. Urology, 2021; 147:223–229; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.046
21.
MoschovasMC, BhatS, SandriM, et al.Comparing the Approach to Radical Prostatectomy Using the Multiport da Vinci Xi and da Vinci SP Robots: A Propensity Score Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes. Eur Urol, 2021; 79(3):393–404; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.042
22.
NohTI, KangYJ, ShimJS, et al.Single-Port vs Multiport Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Comparative Study. J Endourol, 2022; 36(5):661–667; doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0660
23.
ShiangAL, PalkaJK, BalasubramanianS, et al.Comparison of single-port and multi-port Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(3):835–840; doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01464-z
24.
JuG-Q, WangZ-J, ShiJ-Z, et al.A comparison of perioperative outcomes between extraperitoneal robotic single-port and multiport radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si Surgical System. Asian J Androl, 2021; 23(6):640–647; doi: 10.4103/aja.aja_50_21
25.
LenfantL, GaristoJ, SawczynG, et al.Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Perineal Approach: Technique and Single-surgeon Matched-paired Comparative Outcomes. Eur Urol, 2021; 79(3):384–392; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.12.013
26.
HarrisonR, StifelmanM, BillahM, et al.Propensity-Score Matched Analysis Between Extraperitoneal Single Port and Intraperitoneal Multiport Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-Institutional Experience. Urology, 2022; 165:198–205; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.02.027
27.
SoputroNA, ChavaliJS, Ramos-CarpinteyroR, et al.Perioperative Complications of Single-Port and Multiport Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-Institutional Comparison Analysis. J Endourol, 2024; 38(5):450–457; doi: 10.1089/end.2023.0652
28.
LenfantL, SawczynG, AminsharifiA, et al.Pure Single-site Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Versus Multiport Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-institution Comparative Study. Eur Urol Focus, 2021; 7(5):964–972; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.10.006
29.
Hinojosa-GonzalezDE, Roblesgil-MedranoA, Torres-MartinezM, et al.Single-port versus multiport robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the da Vinci SP platform. Prostate, 2022; 82(4):405–414; doi: 10.1002/pros.24296
30.
LiK, YuX, YangX, et al.Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes of Single-Port vs Multiport Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Meta-Analysis. J Endourol, 2022; 36(1):83–98; doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0210
31.
BertoloR, GaristoJ, BoveP, et al.;EAU Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) Working Group on Science. Perioperative Outcomes Between Single-Port and “Multi-Port” Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Where do we stand? Urology, 2021; 155:138–143; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.06.005
32.
LvZ, ChenG, LiY, et al.Perioperative results of single-port vs multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy via peritoneal approach: A meta-analysis. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(4):1309–1318; doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01589-9
33.
WeiY, JiQ, ZuoW, et al.Efficacy and safety of single port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transl Androl Urol, 2021; 10(12):4402–4411; doi: 10.21037/tau-21-850
34.
LiuS, HemalA. Techniques of robotic radical prostatectomy for the management of prostate cancer: Which one, when and why. Transl Androl Urol, 2020; 9(2):906–918; doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.09.13
35.
BraviCA, LarcherA, CapitanioU, et al.Perioperative Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study (The RECORd 2 Project). Eur Urol Focus, 2021; 7(2):390–396; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.10.013
36.
KraneLS, HemalAK. Emerging technologies to improve techniques and outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy: Striving toward the pentafecta. Urol Clin North Am, 2014; 41(4):511–519; doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2014.07.006
37.
SpringerC, GrecoF, AutorinoR, et al.Analysis of oncological outcomes and renal function after laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) partial nephrectomy: A multi-institutional outcome analysis. BJU Int, 2014; 113(2):266–274; doi: 10.1111/bju.12376
38.
KomninosC, ShinTY, TuliaoP, et al.R-LESS partial nephrectomy trifecta outcome is inferior to multiport robotic partial nephrectomy: Comparative analysis. Eur Urol, 2014; 66(3):512–517; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.058
39.
GrecoF, AutorinoR, RhaKH, et al.Laparoendoscopic single-site partial nephrectomy: A multi-institutional outcome analysis. Eur Urol, 2013; 64(2):314–322; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.025
40.
KaoukJ, GaristoJ, EltemamyM, et al.Pure Single-Site Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Using the SP Surgical System: Initial Clinical Experience. Urology, 2019; 124:282–285; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.11.024
41.
OkhawereKE, BeksacAT, WilsonMP, et al.A Propensity-Matched Comparison of the Perioperative Outcomes Between Single-Port and Multi-Port Robotic Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Report from the Single Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC). J Endourol, 2022; 36(12):1526–1531; doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0115
42.
PalaciosAR, MorgantiniL, TrippelR, et al.Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Retroperitoneal Single-Port and Multiport Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomies. J Endourol, 2022; 36(12):1545–1550; doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0346
43.
HarrisonR, AhmedM, BillahM, et al.Single-port versus multiport partial nephrectomy: A propensity-score-matched comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(1):223–231; doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01415-8
44.
MehrazinR, RantiD, AltschulerJ. Early perioperative outcomes of single-port compared to multi-port robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(5):2409–2414; doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01617-8
45.
LiK-P, ChenS-Y, WangC-Y, et al.Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of single-port versus conventional robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: An evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(3):765–777; doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01491-w
46.
NguyenTT, NgoXT, DuongNX, et al.Single-Port vs Multiport Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Meta-Analysis. J Endourol, 2024; 38(3):253–261; doi: 10.1089/end.2023.0505
47.
KimJ, NaJC, LeeJS, et al.Clinical Implications for da Vinci SP Partial Nephrectomy in High-Complexity Tumors: Propensity Score-Matching Analysis. J Endourol, 2022; 36(10):1290–1295; doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0203
48.
GlaserZA, BurnsZR, FangAM, et al.Single- versus multi-port robotic partial nephrectomy: A comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and analgesic requirements. J Robot Surg, 2022; 16(3):695–703; doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01271-y
49.
ReynoldsCR, DeltoJC, PaulucciDJ, et al.Comparison of perioperative and functional outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy for cT1a vs cT1b renal masses. BJU Int, 2017; 120(6):842–847; doi: 10.1111/bju.13960
50.
HemalAK, KumarA, KumarR, et al.Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: A long-term prospective comparison. J Urol, 2007; 177(3):862–866; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.053
51.
HemalAK, KumarA. A prospective comparison of laparoscopic and robotic radical nephrectomy for T1-2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol, 2009; 27(1):89–94; doi: 10.1007/s00345-008-0321-9
52.
KaoukJH, HaberG-P, AutorinoR, et al.A novel robotic system for single-port urologic surgery: First clinical investigation. Eur Urol, 2014; 66(6):1033–1043; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.06.039
53.
FangAM, SaidianA, Magi-GalluzziC, et al.Single-port robotic partial and radical nephrectomies for renal cortical tumors: Initial clinical experience. J Robot Surg, 2020; 14(5):773–780; doi: 10.1007/s11701-020-01053-y
54.
BerryJM, HillH, VetterJM, et al.Single-port vs multi-port robot-assisted renal surgery: Analysis of perioperative outcomes for excision of high and low complexity renal masses. J Robot Surg, 2023; 17(5):2149–2155; doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01637-4
55.
WhiteMA, AutorinoR, SpanaG, et al.Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy: Surgical technique and comparative outcomes. Eur Urol, 2011; 59(5):815–822; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.02.020
56.
SainiS, PathakRA, HemalAK. Robotic nephroureterectomy in the management of upper tract urothelial cancer: Inching toward standard of care? Int Urol Nephrol, 2022; 54(8):1777–1785; doi: 10.1007/s11255-022-03225-1
57.
PathakRA, HemalAK. Techniques and Outcomes of Robot-assisted Nephro-ureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma. Eur Urol Focus, 2018; 4(5):657–661; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.08.007
58.
AboumohamedAA, KraneLS, HemalAK. Oncologic Outcomes Following Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy with Bladder Cuff Excision for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma. J Urol, 2015; 194(6):1561–1566; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.07.081
59.
ParkSY, RhaKH, AutorinoR, et al.Laparoendoscopic single-site nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: Outcomes of an international multi-institutional study of 101 patients. BJU Int, 2013; 112(5):610–615; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11775.x
60.
BabbarP, HemalAK. Robot-assisted urologic surgery in 2010 - Advancements and future outlook. Urol Ann, 2011; 3(1):1–7; doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.75853
61.
PatelMN, HemalAK. Does Advancing Technology Improve Outcomes? Comparison of the Da Vinci Standard/S/Si to the Xi Robotic Platforms During Robotic Nephroureterectomy. J Endourol, 2018; 32(2):133–138; doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0477
62.
PellegrinoAA, MimaM, CrivellaroS. Application of the single-port robotic platform during radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Feasibility of the single-port robot in the multi-quadrant setting. Transl Androl Urol, 2023; 12(9):1469–1474; doi: 10.21037/tau-23-48
63.
BangS, ChoHJ, HaU-S, et al.Retroperitoneal Single-Port Robot-Assisted Nephroureterectomy with Bladder Cuff Excision: Initial Experience and Description of the Technique. J Clin Med, 2023; 12(18):6091; doi: 10.3390/jcm12186091
64.
MenonM, HemalAK, TewariA, et al.Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int, 2003; 92(3):232–236; doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04329.x
65.
MenonM, HemalAK, TewariA, et al.Robot-Assisted radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in female patients: Technique with preservation of the uterus and vagina1. J Am Coll Surg, 2004; 198(3):386–393; doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.11.010
66.
KaderAK, RichardsKA, KraneLS, et al.Robot‐assisted laparoscopic vs open radical cystectomy: Comparison of complications and perioperative oncological outcomes in 200 patients. BJU Int, 2013; 112(4):E290–E294; doi: 10.1111/bju.12167
67.
CattoJWF, KhetrapalP, RicciardiF, et al.;iROC Study Team. Effect of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion vs Open Radical Cystectomy on 90-Day Morbidity and Mortality Among Patients With Bladder Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2022; 327(21):2092–2103; doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.7393
68.
KaoukJ, GaristoJ, EltemamyM, et al.Single-port Robotic Intracorporeal Ileal Conduit Urinary Diversion During Radical Cystectomy Using the SP Surgical System: Step-by-step Technique. Urology, 2019; 130:196–200; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.03.023
69.
ZhangM, ThomasD, SalamaG, et al.Single port robotic radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion: a case series and review. Transl Androl Urol, 2020; 9(2):925–930; doi: 10.21037/tau.2020.01.19
70.
GrossJT, VetterJM, SandsKG, et al.Initial Experience with Single-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Single-Port and Conventional Multiport Approaches. J Endourol, 2021; 35(8):1177–1183; doi: 10.1089/end.2020.1227
71.
FangAM, HayekO, KaylorJM, et al.Postoperative Outcomes and Analgesic Requirements of Single-Port vs Multiport Robotic-Assisted Radical Cystectomy. J Endourol, 2024; 38(5):438–443; doi: 10.1089/end.2023.0553
72.
MorgantiniLA, AlzeinA, BharadwajA, et al.A prospective study on single-port versus multiport patient-reported surgical outcomes. BJUI Compass, 2024; 5(1):84–89; doi: 10.1002/bco2.290
73.
NoëlJ, MoschovasMC, SandriM, et al.Patient surgical satisfaction after da Vinci® single-port and multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: Propensity score-matched analysis. J Robot Surg, 2022; 16(2):473–481; doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01269-6
74.
LenfantL, SawczynG, KimS, et al.Single-institution Cost Comparison: Single-port Versus Multiport Robotic Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus, 2021; 7(3):532–536; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.06.010
