To evaluate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (R-vNOTES) hysterectomy when compared with traditional vNOTES (T-vNOTES) hysterectomy. Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Academic tertiary setting. Patients: Total of 114 patients with benign gynecologic indication for hysterectomy. Interventions: T-vNOTES or R-vNOTES hysterectomy performed by a single minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon in the study period.Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome of this study was surgical equivalence, measured principally by total operative time between T-vNOTES and R-vNOTES hysterectomy. Secondary operative outcomes that were measured included estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, reported postoperative pain levels, and number of conversions. A total of 79 women underwent T-vNOTES hysterectomy, and 35 women underwent R-vNOTES hysterectomy without differences in operative time (p = .37), estimated blood loss (p = .27), length of hospital stay (p = .06), or reported postoperative pain levels at weeks 1, 2, and 3 after surgery (p = .78, p = .36, p = .38, respectively). A total of 6 patients underwent conversion in the T-vNOTES hysterectomy group compared with 0 in the R-vNOTES hysterectomy group; however, this was not statistically significantly different, and there were no conversions to laparotomy. Conclusion: R-vNOTES hysterectomy is a feasible approach to surgery when compared with T-vNOTES hysterectomy and warrants further consideration as a skill set in a gynecologic surgeon's toolbox. Wristed instruments may allow surgeons who are inexperienced in single-site laparoscopy to adopt vNOTES more quickly as a new technique when performing hysterectomy through a comparable minimally invasive approach.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Minimally invasive surgery is currently a preferred treatment for symptomatic ovarian cyst(s), with single-site techniques, such as transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (TU-LESS) and transvaginal laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (TV-LESS), gaining increasing popularity. Although both methods have delivered positive outcomes, there is currently limited literature directly comparing TU-LESS and TV-LESS.Objectives: This study had two primary objectives: (1) to evaluate the safety and feasibility of TV-LESS and TU-LESS for the treatment of ovarian cysts and (2) to compare the surgical and postoperative outcomes of the two procedures.Method: This was a prospective observational clinical analysis of 81 patients with a diagnosis of benign ovarian cyst with indication for TV-LESS or TU-LESS. Surgeries were performed at a tertiary hospital between February 1, 2018 and January 31, 2020. Patients were divided into TV-LESS (n = 40) and TU-LESS groups (n = 40), with one excluded due to severe pelvic adhesive disease. Demographics, operation outcomes, and follow-up details were compared.Results: All 80 patients underwent uncomplicated procedures. The two groups were demographically matched (except age), with no difference in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin loss, and hospitalization costs (P > 0.05). However, TV-LESS patients had significantly faster time to ambulation (P < 0.001), faster time to return of bowel function (P < 0.001), less postoperative pain level (P < 0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (P < 0.001). The cosmetic scores at 1, 4, and 24 weeks after surgery were also higher for the TV-LESS group. Conclusion:Our preliminary experience suggested that TU-LESS and TV-LESS are both feasible and safe for ovarian cystectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy. However, TV-LESS may provide three main advantages including:(1) fewer postoperative complications (i.e. incisional hernia); (2) less postoperative pain; and (3) improved cosmetic satisfaction.