Robotic Sacrocolpopexy—Is It the Treatment of Choice for Advanced Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse?

Oliver, Janine; Kim, Ja-Hong

doi:10.1007/s11934-017-0715-6

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Published data have demonstrated lower rates of dyspareunia and higher rates of bladder injury with RSC [18,22]. However, these complications were not found to be statistically different in the current analysis.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

“…The study also demonstrated that RSC is the most expensive surgical approach to apical prolapse repair, and this finding is likely related to the additional cost of acquisition and maintenance of the robotic system and the recurring costs of consumables. Operating room fees are also more expensive with RSC, owing in part to increased staffing, additional time for robotic setup and docking, and prolonged operating times [17][18][19][20]. Direct costs related to anesthesia, hospital room, medication, imaging and laboratory studies have not been shown to be significantly different among various approaches to apical prolapse repair [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Nationwide costs, utilization and outcomes ninety days following surgery

Lua¹,

Pathak²,

Dandolu³

2019

Clin Obstet Gynecol Reprod Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) has increased dramatically over the last decade. Nationally representative cost estimates of robotic surgery for apical prolapse have yet to be reported. The study determined index and follow-up costs and healthcare utilization up to ninety days after RSC.Methods: Retrospective cohort study was conducted using Truven MarketScan data from 2008 to 2012. Patients were categorized based on route of index procedure and performance of concomitant hysterectomy. Cohorts included RSC (N=2,006), laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) (N=10,708), abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) (N=6,126), and vaginal colpopexy (VC) (N=45,808). Index and follow-up costs were calculated using inpatient, outpatient, emergency, and pharmacy services data. Healthcare utilization was determined from readmissions, emergency room visits, and outpatient visits. T-test and z-test were utilized for statistical analyses.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Nationwide costs, utilization and outcomes ninety days following surgery

Lua¹,

Pathak²,

Dandolu³

2019

Clin Obstet Gynecol Reprod Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an effort to decrease the morbidity associated with open sacrocolpopexy, RSC, which decreases the difficulty associated with laparoscopic knot tying, and 3-dimensional visualization aiding sacral dissection, has rapidly gained popularity. However, variation in surgical technique includes the amount of vaginal dissection, type of mesh, number or location of sutures that should be placed to secure the suspending mesh, retroperitonealization of the mesh, and cervix preservation [6364].…”

Section: Surgery For Apical Vaginal Prolapsementioning

confidence: 99%

Current surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: Strategies for the improvement of surgical outcomes

Lee

2019

Investig Clin Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are a variety of surgical management strategies to help surgeons repair pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Surgical treatment for POP includes native tissue repair, augmentation with mesh, and minimally invasive surgeries. Currently, laparoscopic or robotic techniques for POP repair are increasing in popularity and continuing to evolve. The aim of this review is to present an up-to-date review of surgical techniques used for POP repair and to discuss ways to optimize surgical outcomes.

show abstract

“…With the developments in robotic surgery, robotic sacrocolpopexy was first applied by Di Marco et al in 2004 [9]. The studies showed that minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy had an equivalent efficiency compared to abdominal sacrocolpopexy [10][11][12]. Additionally, speeding up patient recovery and minimizing surgical morbidity have caused extensive use of minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy in recent years [13,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Our Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy Experiences in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment

Şeker¹,

Şam²,

Arikan³

et al. 2021

GJU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the results of our minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) sacrocolpopexy operations in patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Materials and Methods: Demographic characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative data of 15 patients for whom we applied laparoscopic or robotic sacrocolpopexy due to symptomatic Grade 2 or higher apical POP based on POP-Q classification between September 2014 and September 2018. Treatment success was defined as Grade 0 or 1 POP in POP examination in the final surveillance. Results: Mean age of the patients was 60.4 ± 8.3 (49-82) years. Four patients (26.7%) were operated using robotic and eleven patients (73.3%) using laparoscopic methods. Uterus conservative surgery was applied in all patients excluding one. Mean operative time was 183.3 ± 21.4 (145-220) minutes and mean hospital stay of the patients was 2.8 ± 0.7 (2-4) days. Intraoperative and postoperative complications developed in a total of two patients (13.3%). Mean duration of follow-up was calculated as 12.1 ± 4.8 (8-24) months. De novo urgency urinary incontinence developed in two patients and stress incontinence in one patient. Based on the physical examination in the follow-ups, 14 patients (93.3%) had Grade 0 and one patient had (6.7%) asymptomatic Grade 2 anterior POP. Conclusion: Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy is an efficient and safe surgical option for prolapse repair in symptomatic advanced stage POP cases.

show abstract

Robotic Sacrocolpopexy—Is It the Treatment of Choice for Advanced Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse?

Cited by 11 publications

References 69 publications

Robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Nationwide costs, utilization and outcomes ninety days following surgery

Robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Nationwide costs, utilization and outcomes ninety days following surgery

Current surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: Strategies for the improvement of surgical outcomes

Our Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy Experiences in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About