Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Performed with the Novel Hugo™ RAS System: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Surgical, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Background/Objectives: to assess surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed using the novel Hugo™ RAS system. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines, using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases. Eligible papers included studies involving adult males undergoing RARP with the Hugo™ RAS platform, with at least ten patients analyzed. The pooled analysis was performed using a random-effect model. Results: Quantitative analysis was conducted on 12 studies including 579 patients. The pooled median docking time, console time, and operative time were 11 min (95% CI 7.95–14.50; I2 = 98.4%, ten studies), 142 min (95% CI 119.74–164.68; I2 = 96.5%, seven studies), and 176 min (95% CI 148.33–203.76; I2 = 96.3%, seven studies), respectively. The pooled median estimated blood loss was 223 mL (95% CI 166.75–280.17; I2 = 96.5%, eleven studies). The pooled median length of hospital stay and time to catheter removal were 2.8 days (95% CI 1.67–3.89; I2 = 100%, ten studies) and 8.3 days (95% CI 5.53–11.09; I2 = 100%, eight studies), respectively. The pooled rate of postoperative CD ≥ 2 complications was 4.1% (95% CI 1–8.5; I2 = 63.6%, eleven studies). The pooled rate of positive surgical margins and undetectable postoperative PSA were 20% (95% CI 12.6–28.5; I2 = 71.5%, nine studies) and 94.2% (95% CI 87.7–98.6; I2 = 48.9%, three studies), respectively. At three months, a pooled rate of social continence of 81.9% (95% CI 73.8–88.9; I2 = 66.7%, seven studies) was found. Erectile function at six months was 31% in one study. Conclusions: despite the preliminary nature of the evidence, this systematic review and pooled analysis underscores the feasibility, safety, and reproducibility of the Hugo™ RAS system in the context of RARP.