Operating room turnover times for radical prostatectomy: a single center retrospective comparison between multimodular and single-boom robotic systems

Giuseppe Pallotta^1,#, Maria Chiara Sighinolfi^1,#,*, Simona Presutti¹, Antonio Silvestri¹, Ela Patel², Stefano Terzoni³, Stefano Abed¹, Daniele Fettucciari¹, Vincenzo Cavarra¹, Filippo Gavi¹, Giovanni Filomena¹, Francesco Rossi¹, Domenico Varacalli¹, Marco Montesi¹, Nicoletta Testori¹, Arianna Del Proposto¹, Simone Assumma¹, Enrico Panio¹, Bernardo Rocco¹
1 Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
2 Medicine Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
3 Department of Biomedical Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
* Corresponding Author: Maria Chiara Sighinolfi. Email: email
# These authors contributed equally to this work.
(This article belongs to the Special Issue: Advances in Robot-Assisted Urological Surgery: Innovations, Outcomes, and Future Perspectives)

Canadian Journal of Urology https://doi.org/10.32604/cju.2026.076218

Received 16 November 2025; Accepted 11 March 2026; Published online 13 May 2026

Download PDF

Abstract

Background: The introduction of multimodular robotic platforms has raised concerns regarding operating room (OR) efficiency compared to established single-boom systems. This issue is particularly relevant in high-volume robotic programs, where OR turnover time (ORTT) represents a key determinant of productivity and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to compare OR turnover time and closure-to-incision time between a multimodular robotic system (Hugo™ RAS) and a single-boom system (Da Vinci^® Xi) during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a standardized, high-volume setting. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study comparing ORTT and closure-to-incision time (CTIT) between the Da Vinci^® Xi and Hugo™ RAS systems in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). Only homogeneous OR sessions exclusively dedicated to RALP and performed by a stable, experienced robotic team were included. Results: A total of 84 turnovers were analyzed (32 Da Vinci Xi and 52 Hugo RAS). Baseline patient characteristics were comparable between groups. Median ORTT was 45.5 min for Da Vinci Xi and 49.0 min for Hugo RAS (p = 0.139). Median CTIT was 99.0 and 93.5 min, respectively (p = 0.813). Conclusions: In a standardized, high-volume setting, the multimodular architecture of the Hugo RAS system does not result in significantly longer OR turnover times compared to the Da Vinci Xi. Institutional factors such as team experience and workflow standardization appear to outweigh platform-specific technical differences in determining OR efficiency.