Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use

Matthews, Catherine A.; Reid, Natasha; Ramakrishnan, Viswanathan; Hull, Kathryn A.; Cohen, Stephen A.

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.07.022

Cited by 34 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 The difficult minimally invasive surgery is accessible for surgeons without advanced training as it has a short learning curve.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Study of Vaginal, Abdominal, and Robotic Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Outcome and Cost

HanafiMagdi

2015

Journal of Gynecologic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the effects of different hysterectomy methods on the length of hospital stay, postoperative outcome, and total hospital charges. Design: This is a retrospective clinical study of patients from the author's practice. Methods: Data were collected from the office and hospital electronic medical records (EMR), and questionnaires were used to determine patient's postoperative outcome. Patients were divided into three surgical groups: total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH), total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy (RLH). Exactly 211 patients were reviewed, but only 203 had completed medical records. Of those, exactly 140 patient questionnaires were completed. Results: A retrospective study of all consecutive hysterectomy cases from January 1, 2008, to July 31, 2008, was performed. Patient's office and hospital EMRs were used to determine patient demographics, length of hospital stay, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and total hospital charges. TAH was found to have a significantly higher hospital stay of 2.88 days, compared to TVH with 1.66 days and RLH with 1.39 days. RLH had a significantly higher operative time than TVH and TAH. There were no significant differences in hospital charges between RLH and TAH, but both TAH and RH had significantly higher total charges than TVH. In addition, TAH had a higher reported postoperative pain level than TVH and RLH. TAH had a significant higher EBL than RLH, but there was no significant difference in EBL for other methods. Conclusion: Our study reveals a significant difference in the length of hospital stay in TAH versus all other hysterectomy methods. TAH and RLH have a significant difference in hospital charges versus TVH, while there was no significant difference between TAH and RLH hospital charges. TAH had a higher level of postoperative pain than RLH and TVH. ( J GYNECOL SURG 31:260)

show abstract

“…14 The difficult minimally invasive surgery is accessible for surgeons without advanced training as it has a short learning curve.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[14][15][16] The major drawback of the DRS is the loss of tactile and force feedback. This can be surmounted by training and partially compensated for by the 3D visual feedback.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of Vaginal, Abdominal, and Robotic Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Outcome and Cost

HanafiMagdi

2015

Journal of Gynecologic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six studies compared robotic hysterectomy for benign indications with either laparoscopic, abdominal, or vaginal techniques; two studies included either open or vaginal techniques,12,13 and all of them included laparoscopy 12–17. Five of the comparative studies were retrospective,12–14,16,17 and one was a randomized clinical trial 15…”

Section: Robotic Surgery For Benign Indicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two retrospective studies conducted by Landeen et al12 and Matthews et al13 compared robotic and open hysterectomy. Landeen et al12 found that robotic hysterectomy required longer operative time (117.2 min versus 83.7 min, P <0.001).…”

Section: Robotic Surgery For Benign Indicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here

Lauterbach¹,

Matanes²,

Löwenstein³

2017

Rambam Maimonides Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors present a systematic review of randomized and observational, retrospective and prospective studies to compare between robotic surgery as opposed to laparoscopic, abdominal, and vaginal surgery for the treatment of both benign and malignant gynecologic indications. The comparison focuses on operative times, surgical outcomes, and surgical complications associated with the various surgical techniques. PubMed was the main search engine utilized in search of study data. The review included studies of various designs that included at least 25 women who had undergone robotic gynecologic surgery. Fifty-five studies (42 comparative and 13 non-comparative) met eligibility criteria. After careful analysis, we found that robotic surgery was consistently connected to shorter post-surgical hospitalization when compared to open surgery, a difference less significant when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Also, it seems that robotic surgery is highly feasible in gynecology. There are quite a few inconsistencies regarding operative times and estimated blood loss between the different approaches, though in the majority of studies estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic surgery group. The high variance in operative times resulted from the difference in surgeon’s experience. The decision whether robotic surgery should become mainstream in gynecological surgery or remain another surgical technique in the gynecological surgeon’s toolbox requires quite a few more randomized controlled clinical trials. In any case, in order to bring robotic surgery down to the front row of surgery, training surgeons is by far the most important goal for the next few years.

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that robot-assisted hysterectomy is associated with a reduction in estimated blood loss [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27], complication rates [10][11][12][13][14][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] and reduced length of stay but is associated with longer operating times [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gynecological Surgery and the Robot

O’Sullivan¹,

O’Reilly²

2014

ENG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the only robotic device with FDA approval for gynecological surgery, the da Vinci ® Surgical System dominates robot-assisted surgery in the field. Benefits to the Surgeon include decreased risk of neck and back injury secondary to improved ergonomics. However, patients benefit greatly due to decreased length of stay, decreased blood loss and analgesic requirements. Unfortunately the initial economic impact of purchasing and maintaining a robot is great but must be balanced with the potential savings from reduced length of stay and earlier return to normal activity. This article looks at the indications for robot-assisted surgery in gynecology. Assessing the efficacy of this modality compared to both straight stick (Laparoscopy) and open procedures. We discuss the impact and implications for surgical training imposed by robotic surgery. Furthermore, we assess the safety of robotic surgery from both the surgeons prospective and as a surgical modality.

show abstract

Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use

Cited by 34 publications

References 13 publications

Comparative Study of Vaginal, Abdominal, and Robotic Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Outcome and Cost

Comparative Study of Vaginal, Abdominal, and Robotic Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Outcome and Cost

Review of Robotic Surgery in Gynecology—The Future Is Here

Gynecological Surgery and the Robot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About