Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using the Edge Medical MP1000 multi-port surgical robotic system: Experience with 8 cases

Background. Expansion of the surgical platform market due to rapid introduction and clinical implementation of new robotic systems necessitates an objective assessment of efficacy and safety of the new robotic platforms in comparison with the established platforms. The Edge Medical MP1000 multi-port surgical robotic system is a modern platform featuring 3D high-definition visualization and a reported latency of ≤40 ms. The MP1000 surgical platform has been used successfully for more than 6,000 procedures in urology, gynecology, general surgery, and thoracic surgery demonstrating high technological maturity and versatility of this surgical platform. MP1000 robotic system was successfully installed at the Moscow Multidisciplinary Research and Clinical Center named after S.P. Botkin in October 2025, expanding the institution’s surgical capabilities and opening new prospects for the adoption of innovative approaches in robotic urological surgery.

Aim. To assess the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed using the Edge Medical MP1000 multi-port surgical system, and to analyze early oncological and functional outcomes of the procedure, to describe the technical features of the MP1000 platform relevant to surgical performance (docking, ergonomics, visualization, and usability for both the surgeon and the assistant).

Materials and methods. We conducted a single-center prospective cohort study of 8 patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent RARP using the Edge Medical MP1000 multi-port surgical system. One patient also underwent pelvic lymph node dissection. The primary endpoint was the rate of conversion to open surgery. Secondary endpoints included docking time, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, the incidence and nature of intraoperative and postoperative complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification, surgical margin status, length of hospital stay, duration of bladder catheterization, early urinary continence and erectile function outcomes, as well as the surgeon’s subjective assessment of ergonomics and console comfort.

Results. All procedures were successfully completed without the need for conversion to open surgery. Mean docking time was 17.3 (11–25) minutes, and mean operative time was 197.7 minutes. Estimated intraoperative blood loss ranged from 5 to 200 mL (median 88.1 mL). Positive surgical margins were observed in 4 patients. The mean length of hospital stay was 10.5 (7–16) days. Following urethral catheter removal, all patients regained spontaneous voiding, with postvoid residual urine volume not exceeding 50 mL. Early continence (the use of one pad per day) had been achieved in 7 patients by postoperative day 30; there were no cases of severe urinary incontinence. The ergonomic characteristics of the MP1000 were comparable to those of the benchmark platform under similar conditions. No major intraoperative complications were recorded. One patient developed ureteral orifice edema requiring percutaneous nephrostomy.

Conclusion. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy performed using the Edge Medical MP1000 multi-port surgical system is a safe procedure. The early functional outcomes obtained in this series are comparable to those reported for the benchmark robotic platform (da Vinci Xi). Technical features of the system, including high-definition 3D visualization, minimal response latency, precise motion, and convenient positioning, may broaden its potential applications in urological practice. However, the study is limited by the small sample size. Multicenter studies with larger patient cohorts and longer follow-up are required to provide a definitive assessment of efficacy and reproducibility.

1. Siegel R.L., Kratzer T.B., Giaquinto A.N. et al. Cancer statistics, 2025. CA Cancer J Clin 2025;75(1):10–45. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21871

2. Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol 2019;10(2):63–89. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1191

3. Chen L., Zhang Y., Meng Q.H. Prostate cancer in men under 50: the impact of race/ethnicity and family history. Ann Med 2025;57(1):2536202. DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2536202

4. Pasticier G., Rietbergen J.B., Guillonneau B. et al. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol 2001;40(1):70–4. DOI: 10.1159/000049751

5. Ficarra V., Novara G., Rosen R.C. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62(3):405–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045

6. Nguyen T.T., Dobbs R.W., Vuong H.G. et al. Single-port and multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis. Prostate Int 2023;11(4):187–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2023.04.002

7. Nguyen T.T., Moukhtar Hammad M.A., Dobbs R.W. et al. A comparison of surgical outcomes between outpatient and inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Int 2025;13(1):1–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2024.04.003

8. Yang J.W., Wang L., Chen S.Y. et al. Application effect of different robotic surgery systems in radical prostatectomy: A comparative study based on a network meta-analysis. Eur Urol Open Sci 2025;82:25–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2025.09.012

9. Almajali M.N., Zaitoun K.J., Darwish S.W. et al. Emerging robotic platforms in radical prostatectomy: A comparative systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Endourol 2025;39(12):1298–309. DOI: 10.1177/08927790251387344

10. Edge Medical World-Leading and Fast-Growing Surgical Robot Company. URL: https://en.edgemed.cn

11. Chierigo F., Fallara G., Depalma M. et al. Outcomes of robotassisted radical prostatectomy with novel robotic platforms vs da Vinci multiport systems: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2026;29(1):57–72. DOI: 10.1038/s41391-025-01023-1

12. Marino F., Moretto S., Rossi F. et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with the Hugo RAS and da Vinci surgical robotic systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol Focus 2025;11(2):312–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.10.005

13. Lv Z., He J., Zhang L., Chen G. KangDuo system versus da Vinci system for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on prospective studies. J Robot Surg 2025;19(1):679. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02834-z

14. Niu S., Ao L., Gao Y. et al. Suitability of the MP1000 platform for robot-assisted prostatectomy: A prospective randomised controlled trial. Eur Urol Open Sci 2024;64:2–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.02.017

15. Moschovas M.C., Rogers T., Xu W. et al. First impressions of Telesurgery robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy using the Edge medical robotic platform. Int Braz J Urol 2024;50:754–63. DOI: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2024.0458