Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Robotic-Assisted versus Conventional Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Patients with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Effect on Operative Time, Length of Hospital Stay, Postoperative Complications, and Success Rate

Although robotic-assisted procedures may theoretically be more advantageous than conventional laparoscopic ones, few studies have shown clear superiority of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAP) over conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO).To undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of RAP versus CLP for patients with UPJO, focusing on operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and success rate.We searched four electronic bibliographic databases, including the related articles PubMed feature, reference lists from articles, and program abstracts from scientific meetings. Consequently, 58 citations were identified. Two individuals independently screened the titles and abstracts of each citation to select the articles (90% agreement).Studies that compared RAP with CLP for treatment of UPJO were included. Case series on RAP or CLP were excluded because of large heterogeneity.We utilized weighted mean difference (WMD) to measure operative time and length of hospital stay and odds ratio (OR) and risk difference (RD) to measure complication and success rates. These ORs were pooled using a random effects model and were tested for heterogeneity.We identified eight publications that strictly met our eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that RAP was associated with a 10-min operative time reduction (WMD: -10.4 min; 95% CI: -24.6-3; p=0.15) and significantly shorter hospital stay compared with CLP (WMD: -0.5 d; 95% CI: -0.6-0.4; p<0.01). There were no differences between the approaches with regard to rates of complication (OR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.3-1.6; p=0.40) and success (OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 0.5-3.5; p=0.62).RAP and CLP appear to be equivalent with regard to postoperative urinary leaks, hospital readmissions, success rates, and operative time.