Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology

Abstract

We are uncertain as to whether RAS or CLS has lower intraoperative and postoperative complication rates because of the imprecision of the effect and inconsistency among studies when they are used for hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that these procedures take longer with RAS but may be associated with a shorter hospital stay following hysterectomy. We found limited evidence on the effectiveness and safety of RAS compared with CLS or open surgery for surgical procedures performed for gynaecological cancer; therefore its use should be limited to clinical trials. Ongoing trials are likely to have an important impact on evidence related to the use of RAS in gynaecology.

Error reporting from the da Vinci surgical system in robotic surgery: A Canadian multispecialty experience at a single academic centre

“…11 In a Cochrane review about robotic surgery in gynecology, robotic error rates were not reported, nor discussed. 12 In our study, arm collision-related error was the most common recorded error, occurring in 2.0% of cases and representing 4.1% of total robotic faults. Such results validate those reported in the literature.…”

The Impact of Obesity on Intraoperative Complications and Prolapse Recurrence After Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy

“…18 Specifically, a Cochrane review of robotic versus traditional laparoscopic gynecologic surgery did not demonstrate a significant difference in conversion rates between the 2 routes for benign hysterectomy or sacrocolpopexy. 21,22,24 In this study, 7.6% of women met the definition of prolapse recurrence (prolapse at or beyond the hymen). There was no apparent association between obesity and recurrent prolapse.…”

Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial

“…3 The advantages of robotic-assisted surgery as opposed to conventional laparoscopy have been described in retrospective and observational studies. 4 The 3-dimensional view, the better and more precise visibility of the operation area, the fatigue-resistant properties of robot hands, as well as the better mobility and the greater range of movement of the instrument head all facilitate working with the robot. Because of these advantages, the learning curve is faster than in conventional laparoscopy [5][6][7][8] ; eg, endoscopic suturing technique can be adopted faster.…”