Complications of robotic surgery in urological diseases: Are we using standardized methodology to report complications?

5Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose of reviewThe current data on complications reporting related to robot-assisted procedures (RAPs) in the urology literature are not comparable and do not use a validated classification. In this review, findings from various studies reporting positive and negative outcomes will be outlined.Recent findingsRobotic procedures have outcomes similar to open and laparoscopic techniques but generally cause fewer adverse events. However, the lack of standards for presenting surgical morbidity related to RAP leads to underreporting of surgical complications, makes comparisons of surgical outcomes difficult and prevents adequate knowledge about the outcomes of procedures.SummaryAlthough a reasonable number of positive outcomes of RAP have been reported in the literature, the extent of underreporting with this process is unknown. Further research and the development of a validated classification for reporting surgical complications will facilitate a better understanding of the actual outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baccaglini, W., Medina, L., Azhar, R. A., & Sotelo, R. J. (2019). Complications of robotic surgery in urological diseases: Are we using standardized methodology to report complications? Current Opinion in Urology. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000568

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free