Back to Authors

Autorino, Riccardo

0000-0001-7045-7725

Mayo Clinic

Glickman Urological Institute Cleveland Clinic Cleveland Ohio USA.

Citations 2

The learning curve of single‐port extraperitoneal robotic radical prostatectomy: Initial experience and outcomes from a newly graduated fellowship‐trained robotic surgeon
Hershenhouse, Jacob , Kim, S., Gevorkyan, Rafael, Hom, Brian , Eppler, Michael , Ford, Patrick, Pathak, Ram, Autorino, Riccardo, Badani, Ketan K., Crivellaro, Simone, Hemal, Sij, Autorino, Riccardo , Hershenhouse, Jacob S , Autorino, Riccardo , Badani, Ketan K , Abreu, Andre Luis , Badani, Ketan K. , Crivellaro, Simone

BJUI Compass | March 11, 2026 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 3 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/bco2.70184 Get It

Abstract Introduction and Objective This study aims to evaluate the learning curve and perioperative outcomes of single‐port extraperitoneal robotic radical prostatectomy (SP‐EP‐RARP) performed by a single surgeon at a high‐volume academic institution. Methods A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was conducted for patients who underwent SP‐EP‐RARP from September 2023 to August 2025. Key metrics included operative time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, nerve‐sparing status, pathological margin status and continence (0–1 pad for safety), and 30‐day complication rate. Descriptive statistics were used, and outcomes were analysed chronologically to assess for trends suggesting a learning curve. Results The cohort included 53 patients who underwent extraperitoneal SP‐EP‐RARP. Median operative time was 213 min (IQR: 145–281). Median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR: 75–125). Nerve‐sparing was attempted in 75.5% of cases. No assist or plus one ports were utilized. Final pathology revealed pT2 disease in 64.1% (34 cases), pT3a in 32.1% (17 cases) and pT3b in 3.7% (2 cases). Overall positive margin rate was 26.4%. Thirty‐day Clavien–Dindo Grades I–II complication rates were 11.3%, and no major complications or 90‐day complications were reported. Continence rates at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months were 72%, 72% and 75%, respectively. Stabilization of operative times and intraoperative outcomes occurred after approximately 25–30 cases. Conclusion SP‐EP‐RARP can be safely implemented by a newly graduated fellowship‐trained robotic surgeon with acceptable oncologic and functional outcomes. Initial learning can be estimated at approximately 25–30 cases.
A structured training curriculum for robot‐assisted radical nephroureterectomy: a Delphi consensus study
Sayyid, Rashid K. , Wu, Zhenjie , Antonelli, Alessandro , Guo, Shengjie , Hung, Andrew J. , Ma, Lulin , Margulis, Vitaly , Mehrazin, Reza , Porter, James , Potretzke, Aaron M. , Seisen, Thomas , Stein, Robert J. , Wang, Long , Wu, Jitao, Xylinas, Évanguelos , Djaladat, Hooman , Sayyid, Rashid K , Wu, Zhenjie , Abdollah, Firas , Antonelli, Alessandro , Ma, Lulin , Margulis, Vitaly , Matin, Surena F. , Potretzke, Aaron, Simone, Giuseppe , Wang, Long , Autorino, Riccardo , Djaladat, Hooman , Ghoreifi, Alireza , Moghaddam, Farshad Sheybaee , Ghoreifi, Alireza , Abdollah, Firas , Eun, Daniel , Ma, Lulin , Pradère, Benjamin , Rouprêt, Morgan , Shariat, Shahrokh F. , Simone, Giuseppe , Yao, Lin Xin , Zargar, Homayoun S. , Autorino, Riccardo , Cacciamani, Giovanni

BJU International | September 17, 2025 | Volume: 136 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1114-1120

10.1111/bju.70000 Get It

Objectives To develop an internationally validated, structured robot‐assisted radical nephroureterectomy (RARNU) training programme through expert consensus. Materials and Methods A RARNU‐specific questionnaire was developed/adapted from previously published, validated questionnaires for robot‐assisted urological procedures. This included five key domains and 11 surgical steps. In all, 30 upper tract urothelial carcinoma experts were invited to participate. A two‐stage modified Delphi approach was employed. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement. Modifications and additional statements were proposed during the second round following qualitative/quantitative feedback from the initial round. Results Response rates for the first and second Delphi rounds were 80% (24/30) and 92% (22/24), respectively. All agreed that adoption of a standardised training curriculum can improve clinical outcomes during the RARNU learning curve. There was ≥92% agreement on all proposed RARNU steps. Five RARNU clinical modules of increasing complexity were defined using individual step difficulty and number of prior RARNU cases required, with ≥96% agreement among respondents. Respondents unanimously agreed that the final assessment should be based on a procedure‐specific scale focusing on the hilar dissection, ureteric dissection, and bladder cuff excision steps. No consensus was reached for the annual minimum RARNU volume required for eligibility as a RARNU curriculum host centre. Conclusion This is the first structured training curriculum for RARNU using international expert consensus. This will help guide surgical educators and trainees toward independent completion of a full RARNU.