Search

Purpose: We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes, post-operative complications, and opioid use between AirSeal® and non-AirSeal® robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: We retrospectively collected data on 326 patients who underwent elective RARP at our institution either with or without AirSeal®. The first 60 cases were excluded accounting for the institutions' learning curve of RARP. Patient demographics, oncologic, pathologic, and surgical characteristics between AirSeal® and non-AirSeal® cases were compared. Furthermore, outcomes of interest including operative time, length of stay, morbidity, and opioid use for pain management were compared between the two groups. Univariate linear and logistic regression models were developed. Results: The AirSeal® group consisted of 125 (38.3%) patients while the non-AirSeal® group consisted of 201 (61.7%) patients. No statistically significant difference was seen in terms of patient demographics, oncologic characteristics, surgical characteristics, and pathologic characteristics between the two groups. In addition, univariate linear regression showed that RARP with AirSeal® displayed shorter operative times by 12.3 min and a shorter length of hospital stay by 0.5 days compared to the non-AirSeal® group (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the AirSeal® group witnessed lower odds of Clavien-Dindo (CVD) Class > 2 complications (OR = 0.102) and a lower need for opioid use (OR = 0.49) compared to the non-AirSeal® group (p < 0.022). Conclusion: RARP using AirSeal® is associated with shorter operative times, shorter length of hospital stays, lower odds of CVD > 2 complications, and lower odds of opioid use with respect to non-AirSeal® RARP. The efficacy and cost effectiveness of using the AirSeal® system during RARP should be further studied and evaluated by clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]