Table 6.
Author (s) | Year published | Number of patients (total) | Number of robotic patients | Number of open patients | Number of laparoscopic patients | Type of study | Operation time (robotic) | Operation time (open) | Operation time (laparoscopic) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MACE | ||||||||||
Lendvay et al. | 2008 | 1 | 1 | - | - | Retrospective (case report) | 8 h | - | - | |
Thakre et al. | 2008 | 1 | 1 | - | - | Retrospective (case report) | 200 min | - | - | |
Zee et al. | 2017 | 1 | 1 | - | - | Retrospective (case report) | - | - | - | |
Halleran et al. | 2018 | 7 | 7 | - | - | Retrospective | 526 min (313–724) | - | - | |
Galansky and Gundeti* | 2021 | 22 | 11 | 11 | - | Retrospective | 292 min (±59) | 294 min (±154) | - | |
Saoud and Gundeti | 2022 | 28 | 13 | 15 | - | Retrospective | - | - | - | |
| ||||||||||
Author (s) | LOS (robotic) | LOS (open) | LOS (laparoscopic) | Success rate (robotic) (%) | Success rate (open) (%) | Success rate (laparoscopic) | Postoperative complication rate (robotic) (%) | Postoperative complication rate (open) (%) | Postoperative complication rate (laparoscopic) | Follow-up time |
| ||||||||||
MACE | ||||||||||
Lendvay et al. | 5 days | - | - | 100 | - | - | 0 | - | - | 9 months |
Thakre et al. | 5 days | - | - | 100 | - | - | 0 | - | - | - |
Zee et al. | 2 days | - | - | 100 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Halleran et al. | 5 days (median) (4–7) | - | - | 86 | - | - | 29 | - | - | 0.8 years (median) |
Galansky and Gundeti* | 6.8 days (±3.6) | 13 days (±12.6) | - | 91.20 | 91.40 | - | 38.20 | 42.90 | - | 75 months (median) |
Saoud and Gundeti | 7 days median) (6–10) | 8 days (median) (7–11) | - | 84.60 | 87 | - | 23.10 | 40 | - | 66.5 months (robotic); 81 months (open) (median) |
*Outcomes in Galansky and Gundeti (2021) are for combined catheterizable channel procedures (APV, MACE). Mean outcomes are shown unless otherwise listed. MACE=Malone antegrade continence enema, LOS=Length of stay, APV=Appendicovesicostomy