Innovation in Urology Telerobotic Surgery in Improving Treatment Effectiveness and Safety through a Systematic Journal Review
Rendy Franiko*
Edward Julio Suhendra
Thevany
Telerobotic surgery, a specialized field of telesurgery utilizing robotic instruments for remote procedures, has revolutionized surgical precision, reduced invasiveness, and minimized complications. The integration of 5G technology further enhances real-time communication, enabling seamless remote operations. This advancement is particularly beneficial in addressing healthcare disparities, allowing expert surgical interventions in remote and underserved regions. Urological procedures, including those for bladder, kidney, and prostate cancers, have notably benefited from these innovations. However, significant challenges remain, including high costs, complex training requirements, and cybersecurity concerns, which hinder widespread adoption. This study aims to systematically review innovations in urological telerobotic surgery, highlighting its key benefits in improving treatment efficacy and patient safety. A systematic journal review was conducted using a descriptive qualitative approach with thematic synthesis to assess recent innovations and their impact on patient outcomes. Findings indicate that cutting-edge robotic systems such as the da Vinci Single Port (SP) and Senhance improve precision while reducing patient trauma. Artificial intelligence (AI) supports postoperative planning, while 5G technology facilitates real-time remote surgeries. Studies suggest that robotic-assisted procedures yield shorter operation times, reduced complications, and quicker recovery compared to traditional laparoscopy. Despite its benefits, the high costs, infrastructure demands, and extensive training requirements present barriers to widespread implementation. Addressing these challenges requires collaboration between healthcare providers and the technology sector to enhance accessibility and affordability. As advancements continue, telerobotic surgery holds the potential to redefine surgical care, improving patient outcomes and expanding healthcare access globally.
Amin, A., Cardoso, S. A., Suyambu, J., Abdus Saboor, H., Cardoso, R. P., Husnain, A., Isaac, N. V., Backing, H., Mehmood, D., Mehmood, M., & Maslamani, A. N. J. (2024). Future of Artificial Intelligence in Surgery: A Narrative Review. Cureus, 16(1), e51631. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.51631
Bates, D. W., Levine, D., Syrowatka, A., Kuznetsova, M., Craig, K. J. T., Rui, A., Jackson, G. P., & Rhee, K. (2021). The potential of artificial intelligence to improve patient safety: a scoping review. Npj Digital Medicine, 4(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00423-6
Bellos, T., Manolitsis, I., Katsimperis, S., Juliebø-Jones, P., Feretzakis, G., Mitsogiannis, I., Varkarakis, I., Somani, B. K., & Tzelves, L. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in Urologic Robotic Oncologic Surgery: A Narrative Review. Cancers, 16(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16091775
Campero, J. M., Mora, R., & Fulla, J. A. (2024). Technological evolution in urology: assessing laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Uro-Technology Journal. https://doi.org/10.31491/UTJ.2024.06.020
Cascella, L. M. (2024). Robot-Assisted Surgery: Patient Safety and Liability Risks. MedPro Group. https://doi.org/https://www.medpro.com/documents/10502/2820774/Article_Rise+of+the+Machines_Robotic+Surgery.pdf
Catto, J. W. F., Khetrapal, P., Ricciardi, F., Ambler, G., Williams, N. R., Al-Hammouri, T., Khan, M. S., Thurairaja, R., Nair, R., & Feber, A. (2022). Effect of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion vs open radical cystectomy on 90-day morbidity and mortality among patients with bladder cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Jama, 327(21). https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.7393
Chabot, S., Calleja-Agius, J., & Horeman, T. (2024). A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery. Surgical Techniques Development, 13(1), 22–57.
Chairani, F., Puspitasari, I., & Asdie, R. H. (2019). Insidensi dan Faktor Risiko Infeksi Luka Operasi pada Bedah Obstetri dan Ginekologi di Rumah Sakit. Jurnal Manajemen Dan Pelayanan Farmasi (Journal of Management and Pharmacy Practice), 9(4), 274–283. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmpf.48024
Challacombe, B., & Wheatstone, S. (2010). Telementoring and telerobotics in urological surgery. Current Urology Reports, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-009-0086-8
Dr. Canes. (2024). Kidney Stones Prostate Cancer Correlation. drcanes.com. https://drcanes.com/blog/kidney-stones-prostate-cancer-correlation/
Feizi, N., Tavakoli, M., Patel, R. V, & Atashzar, S. F. (2021). Robotics and AI for Teleoperation, Tele-Assessment, and Tele-Training for Surgery in the Era of COVID-19: Existing Challenges, and Future Vision. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.610677
Florida Healthcare Plus. (2024). The Advancement of Robotic Surgery: Changing the Landscape of Healthcare. https://floridahealthcareplus.com/the-advancement-of-robotic-surgery-changing-the-landscape-of-healthcare.html
Hong, S.-Y., & Qin, B.-L. (2024). Recent Advances in Robotic Surgery for Urologic Tumors. Medicina, 60(10), 1573.
Hughes, T., Rai, B., Madaan, S., Chedgy, E., & Somani, B. (2023). The availability, cost, limitations, learning curve and future of robotic systems in urology and prostate cancer surgery. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(6), 2268. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062268
Khetrapal, P., Wong, J. K. L., Tan, W. P., Rupasinghe, T., Tan, W. S., Williams, S. B., Boorjian, S. A., Wijburg, C., Parekh, D. J., & Wiklund, P. (2023). Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative, oncological, and quality of life outcomes using randomized controlled trials. European Urology, 84(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.004
Kirkpatrick, T., & LaGrange, C. (2016). Robotic Surgery: Risks vs. Rewards. Patient Safety Network (PSNet). https://psnet.ahrq.gov/web-mm/robotic-surgery-risks-vs-rewards
Kumar, R., & Nayak, B. (2013). Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty: A single surgeon concurrent cohort review. Indian Journal of Urology, 29(1), 19–21.
Mella, M. H., Chabrillac, E., Dupret-Bories, A., Mirallie, M., & Vergez, S. (2023). Transoral robotic surgery for head and neck cancer: advances and residual knowledge gaps. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(6), 2303. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062303
Meng, F., Chu, G., Zhang, Z., Yuan, H., Li, C., & Niu, H. (2023). Application of 5G telesurgery in urology. UroPrecision, 1(1), 31–37.
Picozzi, P., Nocco, U., Labate, C., Gambini, I., Puleo, G., Silvi, F., Pezzillo, A., Mantione, R., & Cimolin, V. (2024). Advances in Robotic Surgery: A Review of New Surgical Platforms. Electronics, 13(23).
Rabiee, H. S. Al, Alahmari, F. M., & Altowairqi, A. K. (2023). Telesurgery Robotics and Easy Access to Quality Healthcare Services. International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.23958/ijirms/vol08-i12/1795
Rosen, J., Hannaford, B., & Satava, R. M. (2011). Surgical robotics: systems applications and visions. Springer Science & Business Media.
Swartz, T. (2025). Groundbreaking robotic surgery aims to preserve erections — how it works. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2025/01/24/health/groundbreaking-robotic-surgery-aims-to-preserve-erections/
Zi, H., Liu, M.-Y., Luo, L.-S., Huang, Q., Luo, P.-C., Luan, H.-H., Huang, J., Wang, D.-Q., Wang, Y.-B., & Zhang, Y.-Y. (2024). Global burden of benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary tract infections, urolithiasis, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, and prostate cancer from 1990 to 2021. Military Medical Research, 11(1), 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40779-024-00569-w