Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombi are detected in 4%–10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The 5-year survival rates following radical nephrectomy (RN) with IVC thrombectomy for patients with nonmetastatic RCC range between 50%–65%. Despite robot-assisted RN (RARN) with IVC thrombectomy proving to be feasible and potentially lessening complication rates, it remains technically demanding, with significant associated morbidity and mortality risks. Thus, meticulous patient selection and careful surgical planning are of paramount importance. This review aims to encapsulate the latest advancements and outline the detailed surgical processes involved in RARN with IVC thrombectomy.

Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombi are detected in 4%–10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The 5-year survival rates following radical nephrectomy (RN) with IVC thrombectomy for patients with nonmetastatic RCC range between 50%–65%. Despite robot-assisted RN (RARN) with IVC thrombectomy proving to be feasible and potentially lessening complication rates, it remains technically demanding, with significant associated morbidity and mortality risks. Thus, meticulous patient selection and careful surgical planning are of paramount importance. This review aims to encapsulate the latest advancements and outline the detailed surgical processes involved in RARN with IVC thrombectomy.

Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombi are detected in 4%–10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The 5-year survival rates following radical nephrectomy (RN) with IVC thrombectomy for patients with nonmetastatic RCC range between 50%–65%. Despite robot-assisted RN (RARN) with IVC thrombectomy proving to be feasible and potentially lessening complication rates, it remains technically demanding, with significant associated morbidity and mortality risks. Thus, meticulous patient selection and careful surgical planning are of paramount importance. This review aims to encapsulate the latest advancements and outline the detailed surgical processes involved in RARN with IVC thrombectomy.

Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombi are detected in 4%–10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The 5-year survival rates following radical nephrectomy (RN) with IVC thrombectomy for patients with nonmetastatic RCC range between 50%–65%. Despite robot-assisted RN (RARN) with IVC thrombectomy proving to be feasible and potentially lessening complication rates, it remains technically demanding, with significant associated morbidity and mortality risks. Thus, meticulous patient selection and careful surgical planning are of paramount importance. This review aims to encapsulate the latest advancements and outline the detailed surgical processes involved in RARN with IVC thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: The trigeminocardiac reflex (TCR), which occurs after stimulation of the territory of the trigeminal nerve, is very rarely reported to be caused by stimulation of the mandibular branch. We report a case of TCR in open reduction for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dislocation. CASE: A 74-year-old female presented for TMJ dislocation. During open reduction of TMJ under general anesthesia, severe bradycardia (15 beats/min) occurred. Immediately 0.5 mg atropine was administered intravenously, and the surgical manipulation was stopped. After 30 seconds, heart rate normalized. During surgery, severe bradycardia occurred one more time. It disappeared spontaneously as soon as surgical manipulation was stopped. The surgery was completed uneventfully. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the possibility of profound bradycardia, asystole, or even death when evoked, it is important to be aware of the trigeminocardiac reflex during manipulation of the mandibular divisions, especially during surgical stimulation of the TMJ.
Aged ; Anesthesia, General ; Atropine ; Bradycardia ; Dislocations ; Female ; Heart Arrest ; Heart Rate ; Humans ; Reflex, Trigeminocardiac ; Temporomandibular Joint ; Trigeminal Nerve

Purpose: We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and introduced innovative surgical techniques to maintain the instrument positions during the procedures. Materials and Methods: A cohort of 100 patients underwent extraperitoneal SP-RARP at our institution from December 2021 to April 2023. The procedures were performed by an experienced urology surgeon utilizing two surgical techniques for dissecting the posterior aspect of the prostate—“changing instrument roles” and “using camera inversion”—to prevent positional shifts between the camera and instruments. Results: The mean operation time for SP-RARP was 93.58 minutes, and the mean console time was 65.16 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss during the procedures was 109.30 mL. No cases necessitated conversion to multi-port robot, laparoscopy, or open surgery, and there were no major complications during the hospital stay or in the short-term follow-up. Early outcomes of post-radical prostatectomy indicated a biochemical recurrence rate of 4.0% over a mean follow-up duration of 6.40 months, with continence and potency recovery rates of 92.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Analysis of the learning curve showed no significant differences in operation time, console time, and positive surgical margin rates between the initial and latter 50 cases. Conclusions Extraperitoneal SP-RARP is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in skilled hands.Continued accrual of cases is essential for future comparisons of SP-RARP with multiport approaches.

Purpose: We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and introduced innovative surgical techniques to maintain the instrument positions during the procedures. Materials and Methods: A cohort of 100 patients underwent extraperitoneal SP-RARP at our institution from December 2021 to April 2023. The procedures were performed by an experienced urology surgeon utilizing two surgical techniques for dissecting the posterior aspect of the prostate—“changing instrument roles” and “using camera inversion”—to prevent positional shifts between the camera and instruments. Results: The mean operation time for SP-RARP was 93.58 minutes, and the mean console time was 65.16 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss during the procedures was 109.30 mL. No cases necessitated conversion to multi-port robot, laparoscopy, or open surgery, and there were no major complications during the hospital stay or in the short-term follow-up. Early outcomes of post-radical prostatectomy indicated a biochemical recurrence rate of 4.0% over a mean follow-up duration of 6.40 months, with continence and potency recovery rates of 92.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Analysis of the learning curve showed no significant differences in operation time, console time, and positive surgical margin rates between the initial and latter 50 cases. Conclusions Extraperitoneal SP-RARP is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in skilled hands.Continued accrual of cases is essential for future comparisons of SP-RARP with multiport approaches.

Purpose: We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and introduced innovative surgical techniques to maintain the instrument positions during the procedures. Materials and Methods: A cohort of 100 patients underwent extraperitoneal SP-RARP at our institution from December 2021 to April 2023. The procedures were performed by an experienced urology surgeon utilizing two surgical techniques for dissecting the posterior aspect of the prostate—“changing instrument roles” and “using camera inversion”—to prevent positional shifts between the camera and instruments. Results: The mean operation time for SP-RARP was 93.58 minutes, and the mean console time was 65.16 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss during the procedures was 109.30 mL. No cases necessitated conversion to multi-port robot, laparoscopy, or open surgery, and there were no major complications during the hospital stay or in the short-term follow-up. Early outcomes of post-radical prostatectomy indicated a biochemical recurrence rate of 4.0% over a mean follow-up duration of 6.40 months, with continence and potency recovery rates of 92.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Analysis of the learning curve showed no significant differences in operation time, console time, and positive surgical margin rates between the initial and latter 50 cases. Conclusions Extraperitoneal SP-RARP is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in skilled hands.Continued accrual of cases is essential for future comparisons of SP-RARP with multiport approaches.

Purpose: We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and learning curve of extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP) and introduced innovative surgical techniques to maintain the instrument positions during the procedures. Materials and Methods: A cohort of 100 patients underwent extraperitoneal SP-RARP at our institution from December 2021 to April 2023. The procedures were performed by an experienced urology surgeon utilizing two surgical techniques for dissecting the posterior aspect of the prostate—“changing instrument roles” and “using camera inversion”—to prevent positional shifts between the camera and instruments. Results: The mean operation time for SP-RARP was 93.58 minutes, and the mean console time was 65.16 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss during the procedures was 109.30 mL. No cases necessitated conversion to multi-port robot, laparoscopy, or open surgery, and there were no major complications during the hospital stay or in the short-term follow-up. Early outcomes of post-radical prostatectomy indicated a biochemical recurrence rate of 4.0% over a mean follow-up duration of 6.40 months, with continence and potency recovery rates of 92.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Analysis of the learning curve showed no significant differences in operation time, console time, and positive surgical margin rates between the initial and latter 50 cases. Conclusions Extraperitoneal SP-RARP is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in skilled hands.Continued accrual of cases is essential for future comparisons of SP-RARP with multiport approaches.