Yet from its introduction in the surgical field, minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) has been debated for its safety and efficacy. Open surgery stays the gold standard for several years because of MIS's high complication rate, prolonged operative time, and economic burden. Over the years, both laparoscopic and robotic have been widely adopted in the urological field, and not only. The advantages of MIS are a magnification of the operative field, precision of movement, improved surgical dissection with lower bleeding risk, faster postoperative recovery, and cosmetic results.
Magnification of the field has led to a redefinition of the surgical frontiers with smaller visual space and limited control of the surrounding structures. Magnification and precision of movements have shifted the surgical act from a tactile prevalence to a visual prevalence with a lengthening of the operative times and a reduction of all surgical and functional complications.
The complications standardization system, since its first application with the Clavien-Dindo classification, has been improved with the latest EAU intraoperative adverse incident classification. The standardization of surgical complications and functional sequelae will increasingly reduce their impact improving knowledge, treatments, and outcomes.
Limits and complications of MIS have been largely discussed at the begging of its introduction in comparison with the open technique. Several years have been needed before MIS-wide adoption with many open-high-experience surgeons performing it. Time is carrying on, and in the urological field new technologies and new technical skills have been demanded. This has led to several new urologists performing surgery in the operative theatre with high MIS experience and limited open-surgery experience.
Over twenty years of MIS, its limits, complications, and relative prevention or management are still changing. It, therefore, seems essential to investigate the issue of complications, also for their prevention.
This Research topic takes into account pelvic complications of urological MIS. We encourage contributions concerning the complications in the most frequent standardized and new urological MIS procedures of the pelvis, in particular, focusing on:
- MIS for prostate cancer;
- MIS for radical cystectomy;
- MIS for urogynecology diseases;
- MIS for simple prostatectomy;
- MIS for benign pelvic diseases;
- MIS and pediatric urology.
Are of interest are limits, complications, their prevention, predictor factors of complications and of conversion to open surgery, and prompt or delayed management of these complications.
Yet from its introduction in the surgical field, minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) has been debated for its safety and efficacy. Open surgery stays the gold standard for several years because of MIS's high complication rate, prolonged operative time, and economic burden. Over the years, both laparoscopic and robotic have been widely adopted in the urological field, and not only. The advantages of MIS are a magnification of the operative field, precision of movement, improved surgical dissection with lower bleeding risk, faster postoperative recovery, and cosmetic results.
Magnification of the field has led to a redefinition of the surgical frontiers with smaller visual space and limited control of the surrounding structures. Magnification and precision of movements have shifted the surgical act from a tactile prevalence to a visual prevalence with a lengthening of the operative times and a reduction of all surgical and functional complications.
The complications standardization system, since its first application with the Clavien-Dindo classification, has been improved with the latest EAU intraoperative adverse incident classification. The standardization of surgical complications and functional sequelae will increasingly reduce their impact improving knowledge, treatments, and outcomes.
Limits and complications of MIS have been largely discussed at the begging of its introduction in comparison with the open technique. Several years have been needed before MIS-wide adoption with many open-high-experience surgeons performing it. Time is carrying on, and in the urological field new technologies and new technical skills have been demanded. This has led to several new urologists performing surgery in the operative theatre with high MIS experience and limited open-surgery experience.
Over twenty years of MIS, its limits, complications, and relative prevention or management are still changing. It, therefore, seems essential to investigate the issue of complications, also for their prevention.
This Research topic takes into account pelvic complications of urological MIS. We encourage contributions concerning the complications in the most frequent standardized and new urological MIS procedures of the pelvis, in particular, focusing on:
- MIS for prostate cancer;
- MIS for radical cystectomy;
- MIS for urogynecology diseases;
- MIS for simple prostatectomy;
- MIS for benign pelvic diseases;
- MIS and pediatric urology.
Are of interest are limits, complications, their prevention, predictor factors of complications and of conversion to open surgery, and prompt or delayed management of these complications.
