A Comparison of the Da Vinci Xi Vs. Da Vinci Si Surgical Systems for Radical Prostatectomy

Overview

Journal BMC Surg

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty General Surgery

Date 2021 Dec 1

PMID 34847882

Citations 4

Authors

Kun-Yang Lei

Wen-Jie Xie

Sheng-Qiang Fu

Ming Ma

Ting Sun

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To compare the perioperative and short-term efficacy and cost of the da Vinci Xi and da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 175 patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si or Xi surgical systems in our hospital from June 2019 to June 2020. Of the 175 patients, 82 underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Xi surgery system, and 93 patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the da Vinci Si surgical system. The perioperative outcomes, short-term efficacy and costs were compared between the two groups.

Results: The anesthesia time, operation time, docking time, indwelling catheter time and postoperative bed rest time in the Xi group were shorter than those in the Si group (respectively, 268.8 min vs. 219.3 min, P = 0.001; 228.2 min vs. 259.6 min, P < 0.001; 7.4 min vs. 12.7 min, P < 0.001; 8.6 d vs. 9.7 d, P = 0.036; 2.2 d vs. 2.6 d, P = 0.002). However, the total cost of hospitalization and the cost of intraoperative consumables in the Xi group were higher than those in the Si group (84,740.7 vs. 76,739.1 ¥, P = 0.003; 13,199.4 vs. 10,823.0 ¥, P = 0.019).

Conclusions: Although the cost of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is higher, compared with the Si system, the Xi system has better perioperative outcomes and can provide similar short-term efficacy and oncology outcomes.

Citing Articles

Economic evaluations of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and the factors affecting its cost-effectiveness: a systematic review.

Lei Q, Li H, Zhao J, Li J, Dai Y, Hu M J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):370.

PMID: 39402291 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02125-z.

Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: efficiency of robotic assistance compared to standard laparoscopy.

Evangelopoulos N, Nessi A, Achtari C J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):72.

PMID: 38340232 PMC: 10858822. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01799-1.

Single-port and multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis.

Nguyen T, Dobbs R, Vuong H, Quy K, Ngo H, Mai A Prostate Int. 2024; 11(4):187-194.

PMID: 38196552 PMC: 10772183. DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2023.04.002.

Learning curves of resection and reconstruction procedures in robotic-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy by a single surgeon: a retrospective cohort study of 160 consecutive cases.

Huang X, Wang X, Xie J, Cai J, Chen W, Chen L Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2023; 11:goad042.

PMID: 37502197 PMC: 10371495. DOI: 10.1093/gastro/goad042.

References

Qi F, Wang S, Xu H, Gao Y, Cheng G, Hua L . A comparison of perioperative outcome between robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience of a single institution. Int Braz J Urol. 2019; 45(4):695-702. PMC: 6837604. DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0367. View

Kaouk J, Aminsharifi A, Wilson C, Sawczyn G, Garisto J, Francavilla S . Extraperitoneal versus Transperitoneal Single Port Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes. J Urol. 2019; 203(6):1135-1140. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000700. View

Protyniak B, Jorden J, Farmer R . Multiquadrant robotic colorectal surgery: the da Vinci Xi vs Si comparison. J Robot Surg. 2017; 12(1):67-74. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-017-0689-x. View

Siegel R, Miller K, Jemal A . Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020; 70(1):7-30. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21590. View

Wang K, Zhuang Q, Xu R, Lu H, Song G, Wang J . Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal approach in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(29):e11176. PMC: 6086463. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011176. View

Davis M, Egan J, Marhamati S, Galfano A, Kowalczyk K . Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Robotic Prostatectomy: Past, Present, and Future. Urol Clin North Am. 2020; 48(1):11-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2020.09.012. View

Inkaya A, Tahra A, Sobay R, Kumcu A, Kucuk E, Boylu U . Comparison of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer. Turk J Urol. 2019; 45(6):410-417. PMC: 6788567. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2019.48457. View

Patel M, Hemal A . Does Advancing Technology Improve Outcomes? Comparison of the Da Vinci Standard/S/Si to the Xi Robotic Platforms During Robotic Nephroureterectomy. J Endourol. 2017; 32(2):133-138. DOI: 10.1089/end.2017.0477. View

Feng Z, Feng M, Feng D, Solorzano C . Robotic-assisted adrenalectomy using da Vinci Xi vs. Si: are there differences?. J Robot Surg. 2019; 14(2):349-355. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-019-00995-2. View

10.

Hill A, McCormick J . In experienced hands, does the robotic platform impact operative efficiency? Comparison of the da Vinci Si versus Xi robot in colorectal surgery. J Robot Surg. 2020; 14(5):789-792. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-020-01055-w. View

11.

van der Schans E, Hiep M, Consten E, Broeders I . From Da Vinci Si to Da Vinci Xi: realistic times in draping and docking the robot. J Robot Surg. 2020; 14(6):835-839. PMC: 7674320. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-020-01057-8. View

12.

Mortezavi A, Sulser T, Robbiani J, Drescher E, Disteldorf D, Eberli D . Long-Term Oncologic Outcome of an Initial Series of Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer After a Median Follow-up of 10 Years. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2015; 14(4):290-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2015.11.006. View

13.

Wieder J, Soloway M . Incidence, etiology, location, prevention and treatment of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol. 1998; 160(2):299-315. View

14.

Morelli L, Di Franco G, Lorenzoni V, Guadagni S, Palmeri M, Furbetta N . Structured cost analysis of robotic TME resection for rectal cancer: a comparison between the da Vinci Si and Xi in a single surgeon's experience. Surg Endosc. 2018; 33(6):1858-1869. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6465-9. View

15.

Greco K, Meeks J, Wu S, Nadler R . Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in men aged > or =70 years. BJU Int. 2009; 104(10):1492-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08718.x. View

16.

Yang Y, Liu Z, Guo Y, Li X, Liu L, Wang X . The Efficiency and Safety of Transperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Single Center Experience with 1-year Follow-up. Urol J. 2020; 17(5):480-485. DOI: 10.22037/uj.v16i7.5475. View

17.

Patel M, Aboumohamed A, Hemal A . Does transition from the da Vinci Si to Xi robotic platform impact single-docking technique for robot-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy?. BJU Int. 2015; 116(6):990-4. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13210. View

18.

Huang Y, Huang Y, Wei P . Colorectal Cancer Surgery Using the Da Vinci Xi and Si Systems: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes. Surg Innov. 2018; 26(2):192-200. DOI: 10.1177/1553350618816788. View

19.

Chen H, Lian B, Dong Z, Wang Y, Qu M, Zhu F . Experience of one single surgeon with the first 500 robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy cases in mainland China. Asian J Urol. 2020; 7(2):170-176. PMC: 7096692. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2019.12.004. View

20.

Abdel Raheem A, Sheikh A, Kim D, Alatawi A, Alabdulaali I, Han W . Da Vinci Xi and Si platforms have equivalent perioperative outcomes during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: preliminary experience. J Robot Surg. 2016; 11(1):53-61. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-016-0612-x. View