Initial experience with the novel modular robotic system Carina in urology: a prospective study on safety feasibility and surgical settings
Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Robot-assisted surgery has transformed urology, but widespread adoption remains limited by the high cost, complex setup, and rigid system design. This prospective single-center study evaluates the safety and efficacy of the novel modular Carina in 19 upper and lower urinary tract surgeries. All cases were completed robotically without conversion, with one major complication. For partial nephrectomy (PN), median operative time (OT) was 120 min with 50 mL estimated blood loss (EBL), including one off-clamp PN completed in 77 min (EBL: 50 mL). Pyeloplasty had a median OT of 105 min (EBL: 50 mL), while radical prostatectomy (RP) achieved a median OT of 150 min (EBL: 50 mL). Radical cystectomy was completed in 301 min without major complications, and an uncomplicated postoperative course. Median docking times were 5 and 8 min for upper and lower tract surgeries, with negative margins and preserved renal function in all PN, and social continence post-RP. The Carina system demonstrates procedural safety and feasibility in complex urological procedures. The modular design may enhance workflow and space utilization, suggesting the potential for promising tool and broader clinical applications. Further validation with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up is needed.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Initial experience with the novel modular robotic system Carina in urology: a prospective study on safety feasibility and surgical settings
- Date Crossref
- 12/04/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.