Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Clinical Research
  • Published:

Comparison of senhance and da vinci robotic radical prostatectomy: short-term outcomes, learning curve, and cost analysis

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 27, pages 116–121 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

The Senhance® Robotic System is a new laparoscopy-based platform that has been increasingly used in radical prostatectomy (RP) procedures. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcome of Senhance RP (SRP) with da Vinci RP (DRP) cases.

Methods

From August 2019 to April 2022, we prospectively recruited 63 cases of SRP. We compared the perioperative data, postoperative complication rates, short-term surgical outcomes (3-month postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and incontinence rates), learning curves, and cost analysis with data from 63 matched da Vinci Xi RP cases.

Results

There was no difference in BL (180 versus 180 ml, p = 0.86) and postoperative surgical complication rate (Clavient -Dindo grade I-IV, 25.3 versus 22.2%, p = 0.21) between the SRP cases and the DRP. Regarding the oncologic and continence function, there was no difference between positive margin rate (36.5% versus 41.3%, p = 0.58), rate of undetectable PSA level at postoperative 3 months (68.3 versus 66.7%, p = 0.85), and incontinence rate (14.3 versus 15.9%, p = 1.0) at postoperative 3 months between the two cohorts. The learning curve showed a quick downward slope for laparoscopic experienced surgeons. The median pocket cost for SRP patients in our hospital was $4170, which was lower than $7675 for the DRP patients.

Conclusions

Safety and short-term outcomes are comparable between SRP and DRP. For experienced LRP surgeons, using the Senhance system to perform RP is straightforward. With a more affordable price as its biggest advantage, the Senhance system may serve as a safe and effective alternative for robotic RP.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Ports placement and set-up for Senhance robotic radical prostatectomy.
Fig. 2: Operative time (OT) during successive cases for Senhance and da Vinci robotic radical prostatectomy.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sun M, Ravi P, Ghani KR, Bianchi M, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur Urol. 2012;61:679–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hussain A, Malik A, Halim MU, Ali AM. The use of robotics in surgery: a review. Int J Clin Pract. 2014;68:1376–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. EAU guidelines on Prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer, 2023.

  4. Rumolo V, Rosati A, Tropea A, Biondi A, Scambia G. Senhance robotic platform for gynecologic surgery: a review of literature. Updates Surg. 2019;71:419–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kastelan Z, Hudolin T, Kulis T, Knezevic N, Penezic L, Maric M, et al. Upper urinary tract surgery and radical prostatectomy with Senhance(®) robotic system: single center experience-first 100 cases. Int J Med Robot. 2021;17:e2269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stephan D, Sälzer H, Willeke F. First experiences with the new Senhance® Telerobotic system in visceral surgery. Visc Med. 2018;34:31–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. McCarus SD. Senhance robotic platform system for gynecological surgery. JSLS. 2021;25:e2020.00075.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Venckus R, Jasenas M, Telksnys T, Venckus M, Janusonis V, Dulskas A, et al. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with the Senhance(®) robotic platform: single center experience. World J Urol. 2021;39:4305–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Samalavicius NE, Janusonis V, Siaulys R, Jasėnas M, Deduchovas O, Venckus R, et al. Robotic surgery using Senhance(®) robotic platform: single center experience with first 100 cases. J Robot Surg. 2020;14:371–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kaštelan Ž, Knežević N, Hudolin T, Kuliš T, Penezić L, Goluža E, et al. Extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy with the Senhance surgical system robotic platform. Croat Med J. 2019;60:556–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hudolin T, Kuliš T, Penezić L, Zekulić T, Knežević N, Čikić B, et al. Senhance robotic radical prostatectomy: A single‐Centre, 3‐Year experience. Int J Med Robot. 2023 15;e2549

  12. Kastelan Z, Hudolin T, Kulis T, Penezic L, Gidaro S, Bakula M, et al. Extraperitoneal Radical Prostatectomy with the Senhance Robotic Platform: First 40 Cases. Eur Urol. 2020;78:932–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kulis T, Hudolin T, Penezic L, Zekulic T, Saic H, Knezevic N, et al. Comparison of extraperitoneal laparoscopic and extraperitoneal Senhance radical prostatectomy. Int J Med Robot. 2022;18:e2344.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sturch P, Raison NT, Challacombe B. Clinical utility of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: advances and current status. Robot Surg. 2015;2:43–49.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hagen ME, Meehan JJ, Inan I, Morel P. Visual clues act as a substitute for haptic feedback in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2008;22:1505–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wottawa CR, Genovese B, Nowroozi BN, Hart SD, Bisley JW, Grundfest WS, et al. Evaluating tactile feedback in robotic surgery for potential clinical application using an animal model. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:3198–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Taiwan Cancer Registry Database 2020, https://twcr.tw/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CA16_LF109-v2.pdf

  18. Greenberg SA, Cowan JE, Lonergan PE, Washington SL III, Nguyen HG, Zagoria RJ, et al. The effect of preoperative membranous urethral length on likelihood of postoperative urinary incontinence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022;25:344–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu J, Zhang J, Yang Z, Liu Q, Zhang W, Qing Z, et al. Comparison of Retzius-sparing and conventional robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding continence and sexual function: an updated meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022;25:47–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Iacovelli V, Carilli M, Sandri M, Forte V, Cipriani C, Bertolo R, et al. The role of preoperative prostatic shape in the recovery of urinary continence after robotic radical prostatectomy: a single cohort analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2023;26:374–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Coussons H, Feldstein J, McCarus S. Senhance surgical system in benign hysterectomy: a real-world comparative assessment of case times and instrument costs versus da Vinci robotics and laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy procedures. Int J Med Robot. 2021;17:e2261.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Yen-Chun Lin, Lun-Hsiang Yuan.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Yunlin branch, Yunlin, Taiwan

    Yen-Chun Lin, Lun-Hsiang Yuan, Yu-Wen Huang & Shi-Wei Huang

  2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan

    Lun-Hsiang Yuan

  3. Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chi-Shin Tseng, Tsung-Yi Hsieh & Chao-Yuan Huang

Authors
  1. Yen-Chun Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lun-Hsiang Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chi-Shin Tseng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tsung-Yi Hsieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yu-Wen Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chao-Yuan Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shi-Wei Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Concept: LHY, YCL; Provision of study material or patients: LHY, CYH, YWH, SWH; data acquisition: YCL, LHY; Data analysis and interpretation: YCL, LHY, SWH; manuscript drafting: YCL, LHY; Final approval of manuscript; SWH, CYH, CST; Language editing: TYH. All authors reviewed the paper and agreed to the published version of the manuscript

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shi-Wei Huang.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of National Taiwan University Hospital (Approval code: 202004072RINA).

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, YC., Yuan, LH., Tseng, CS. et al. Comparison of senhance and da vinci robotic radical prostatectomy: short-term outcomes, learning curve, and cost analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 27, 116–121 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-023-00717-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-023-00717-8

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links