Heat shock protein 27 is a small kind of protein which is produced under stress. HSP 27 is highly conservative, and plays an important role in ischemia-reperfusion injury. With the development of organ transplantation technique,the transplantation of heart,liver,kidney becomes more and more popular, the ischemia-reperfusion injury is a significant part of the management of these procedures. The endogenic research against the injury becomes more vital. This article is the first review of the relationship between heat shock protein 27 and ischemiareperfusion injury.

Objective To compare the safety and oncological results of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed between transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approach.Methods 79 patients underwent transperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Tp-RLRP).The other 86 consecutive patients went through extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (Ep-RLRP).Results All procedures were performed successfully without conversion.Total procedure time for Ep-RLRP was shorter than it for Tp-RLRP[(218.1 ± 54.4) min vs.(180.2 ± 47.1) min,P ＜ 0.001].Docking time for Ep-RLRP was longer than Tp-RLRP [(21.5 ± 7.1) min vs.(19.5 ± 5.7) min,P ＜ 0.001] Blood lost of Tp-RLRP was lesser than Ep-RLRP[(122.4 ± 71.0) ml vs.(140.4 ± 90.7) ml,P ＜ 0.05].There were no significant differences between two groups in terms of bowel function recovery,drainage tube reserve,foley catheter duration,etc.There were 19 patients (24.1％)and 4 patients (4.7％)were suffered lymph leakage in two groups separately,P ＜ 0.001.One delayed vesiclurethra hemorrhagic patient and one mesenteric torsion patient were happened in Tp-RLRP group.There were no significant differences between two groups in terms of surgical margin,biochemical recurrence and urine continence.Conclusion Compared to Tp-RLRP,Ep-RLRP can provide similar short-term oncological control,recovery of postoperative urine continence,shorter operation time and lower complication rates.

Objective To assess the safety and feasibility of utility of the third arm in robotic partial nephrectomy(RPN) through retroperitoneal approach for complex renal tumor.Methods 36 roboticassisted partial nepbrectomy were performed by one surgeon between November 2015 and January 2017,including hilar tumors in 12 cases,central tumors in 11 cases,endophytic tumors in 7 cases and multiple tumors in 6 cases.A 12 mm camera port is placed 2 fingerbreadth above iliac crest.The lateral and medial robotic trocars are placed in the posterior axillary line and anterior axillary plane respectively parallel to the cameraport trocar.Under direct visualization,the peritoneum is swept medially towards the paramedianplane.The fourth arm trocar is placed in the most medial and inferior aspect of the field approximately 7 cm to 8 cm across and parallel to the medial robotic trocar.Descriptive statistics on patient characteristics,operative parameters,and oncologic outcomes are analyzed.Result The 4-arms retroperitoneal approach was used in all patients without any conversion.Mean console time was 127 ± 21 (98-357) min.Mean ischemia time was 25.5 ± 8.3 (12-38) min,Mean estimated blood lost was 198 ± 201.5 (50-510) ml.No patients required blood transfusion,except one case underwent selective intra-arterial embolization with DSA (digital subtraction angiography) and blood transfusion post-operatively.Pathology revealed renal cell carcinoma in 12 patients,angiomyolipoma in 16 patients,chromophobe renal cell carcinoma in 6 cases,oncocytoma in 2 cases and all had negative surgical margins.Under 3 months follow-up,Mean decrease in eGFR was 4.3 ml/(min · 1.73m2).No patients found recurrence or metastasis.Conclusions The third robotic arm provides the console surgeon maximal independence from the surgical assistant when performing kidney retraction,ligation or clamping of renal hilar vessels in complex renal morbidities.It would be beneficial for patient with merits of retroperitoneal approach and overcomes limited space during RPN.

Objective To explore the feasibility and safety of the posterior approach of robotassisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and to the approach.Methods From November 2001 to April 2017,32 patients underwent posterior approach of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.Patients aged 53 to 81 years,with mean of 66.9 years old.Their prostate volumes were 12.0-73.7 ml with an average of 32.9 ml.All patients were diagnosed by prostate biopsy before surgery.The operation time,blood loss and length of hospital stay were recorded.Results All the operations were completed by robotic assisted laparoscopy with no transition to open surgery.The surgery time was 129-210 minutes with an average of 163.6 minutes.The estimated blood loss was 20-200 ml with an average of 59.3 ml.The hospital stay was 8-21 days with an average of 12.8 days.The postoperative hospital stay was 3-13 days with an average of 6.9 days.The time of postoperative catheter removal was 4-14 days with an average of 7.5 days.Postoperative follow-up was 1-6 months.Twenty-four (75％) patients had early recovery of continence,and all (100％) patients regained continence 3-month postoperatively.Conclusion The posterior approach of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was a safe and effective surgical technique,which was beneficial in early continence recovery.

Objective:To investigate the safety and efficacy of the novel single-port surgical robotic surgical system in extraperitoneal urological surgery.Methods:From February to April 2022, patients was prospectively enrolled who required laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy and adrenal tumor resection in urology department. Inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 18 years old; BMI 18.5-30 kg/m 2; American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system grades 1 to 3; can cooperate with the completion of the visits and related examinations stipulated in the plan, and participate voluntarily clinical trials, and consent or the guardian agrees to sign the informed consent form; tumor indicators meet one of the following surgical treatment indications: kidney tumor T 1 stage, single, maximum tumor diameter ≤ 4 cm; prostate cancer, stage ≤ T 2b, preoperative PSA ≤ 20 ng /ml; Gleason score ≤ 7; adrenal tumor diameter ≤ 7 cm, for non-functioning adrenal adenoma, tumor diameter ≥ 3 cm. Exclusion criteria were: patients with other malignancies or a history of other malignancies and the investigators believe that they are not suitable for inclusion in this researcher; patients who have received the same type of urological surgery in the past and are not suitable for participating in this study as assessed by the investigators; included Those who have undergone other major surgery within the first 3 months and during the trial period, or who cannot recover from the side effects of any such surgery; syphilis, hepatitis B, HIV infection and carriers; long-term use of anticoagulants or blood system diseases; Unable to use effective contraception during the trial period and other conditions that the investigators deem inappropriate to participate in this trial. All operations were performed by a novel single-port robotic surgical operating system, and all surgical procedures were performed through an extraperitoneal approach. Surgical method: the surgical system is mainly composed of a remote console including a high-definition display, a surgical equipment trolley, a surgical execution system that accommodates a serpentine robotic arm, and a bendable serpentine robotic arm. In this study, the extraperitoneal approach was used. For radical prostatectomy, the patient was placed in a supine position, a longitudinal incision of about 3 cm was made below the umbilicus, the anterior rectus sheath was incised, the extraperitoneal space was separated, and an operating sheath was placed. A 12 mm trocar is placed between the right McBurney point and the umbilicus as an auxiliary hole. For partial nephrectomy and adrenal tumor resection, the patient is placed in the lateral position, and an 3cm incision is made 2 cm above the iliac crest on the midaxillary line as the main operating hole. The skin, subcutaneous tissue, and muscle were incised to the retroperitoneal cavity, and a 12mm trocar was placed at the level of the anterior superior iliac spine on the anterior axillary line as an auxiliary hole. The operation was performed after connecting each robotic arm. After the operation, the specimen was placed in the specimen bag, and a drainage tube is placed in the auxiliary hole, the specimen was taken out, and the incision was closed in turn. Preoperative basic information, operation time, blood loss, incision size, postoperative complications, preoperative and postoperative PSA score, eGFR index, postoperative pathological information and other perioperative information were collected. Results:A total of 17 patients were included in this study, including 6 with prostate cancer, 8 with renal tumor, and 3 with adrenal tumor. There were 9 males and 8 females, with an average age of (56.7±14.6) years and a BMI of (23.3±3.4) kg/m 2. The mean operation time of radical prostatectomy was (244.6±35.1) min, the mean operating time of the chief surgeon was (184.0±39.0) min, and the mean blood loss was (36.6±23.8) ml. Postoperative positive margin was found in 2 cases. The average operation time of partial nephrectomy was (189.6±49.4) minutes, the average operating time of the chief surgeon was (115±39.7) minutes, the average blood loss was (12.7±8.3) ml, and the average warm ischemia time was (23.1±10.8) minutes. There was no significant difference in the eGFR index before and after the operation ( P>0.05). The average operation time of adrenalectomy was (177.6±26.9) min, the average operating time of the chief surgeon was (99±20.4) min, and the average blood loss was (11.6±6.2) ml. The overall average operation time of the three surgical methods was (206.9±50.1) min, the overall average operating time of the chief surgeon was (136.5±51.1) min, the overall average blood loss was (21.0±9.2) ml, and the overall average incision size was (3.5±0.5) cm, all added a 12 mm auxiliary channel, and the overall average hospital stay was (8.1±2.7) days. All operations were successfully completed, and there was no conversion to open surgery during the operation, and no operation holes were added. There was no Clavien-Dindo≥grade 3 complication after operation. Conclusions:The novel single-port robot could safely and effectively perform radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy and adrenalectomy which are common in urology through extraperitoneal approach.