Literature DB >> 18382994

Robotic-assisted gynaecological surgery-establishing training criteria; minimizing operative time and blood loss.

Michael C Pitter1, Patrick Anderson, Amelia Blissett, Nicola Pemberton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective was an evaluation of operative time and estimated blood loss (EBL) as a function of experience in gynaecological robotic surgery.
METHOD: A retrospective analysis of 40 consecutive cases (approximately one case/week) over a 1 year period using the da Vinci) robotic system was performed, using data from two institutions, Newark Beth Israel Medical Center and Hackensack University Medical Center. Information was obtained from a single surgeon. Among the 40 cases there were 17 hysterectomies and 23 myomectomies. Each patient met the criteria of benign disease. In each institution, a da Vinci) system using three instrument arms and a camera arm was employed for every operation.
RESULTS: Tests of differences in means were performed to compare the two groups. In group I (cases 1-20) the mean uterine volume was 863.0 cc and was similar to Group II (cases 21-40) at 632.6 cc. There was no significant difference between the groups when comparing blood loss; means were 86 cc for group I and 62.5 cc for group II. Operative time between groups, however, showed a significant difference (mean of 211.8 min for group 1 compared to 151 min for group 2; p < 0.05) and console time demonstrated a similar trend (mean for group 1 was 159.8 min compared to 90.8 min for group 2; p < 0.05). There were no conversions to laparotomy. Body mass index (BMI) and prior abdominal surgery were not significantly different. Multivariate regressions on operative time and EBL were performed, controlling for uterine weight and volume. The effect of experience on operative time was significant and negative; the coefficient on EBL was not significant.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates statistical improvement in operative time after the first 20 cases for a single surgeon. This information could be used to establish criteria for training surgeons. (c) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18382994     DOI: 10.1002/rcs.183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Robot        ISSN: 1478-5951            Impact factor:   2.547


  15 in total

1.  Survey of robotic surgery credentialing requirements for physicians completing OB/GYN residency.

Authors:  Britt K Erickson; Jonathan L Gleason; Warner K Huh; Holly E Richter
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 4.137

2.  Are perioperative bundles associated with reduced postoperative morbidity in women undergoing benign hysterectomy? Retrospective cohort analysis of 16,286 cases in Michigan.

Authors:  John A Harris; Anne G Sammarco; Carolyn W Swenson; Shitanshu Uppal; Neil Kamdar; Darrel Campbell; Sarah Evilsizer; John O DeLancey; Daniel M Morgan
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Standardized surgical technique and dedicated operating room environment can reduce the operative time during robotic-assisted surgery for pelvic floor disorders.

Authors:  Surendra Mantoo; Jerome Rigaud; Sophie Naulet; Paul-Antoine Lehur; Guillaume Meurette
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2013-06-07

Review 4.  Uterine fibroids and current clinical challenges.

Authors:  Salama S Salama; Gökhan S Kılıç
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2013-03-01

5.  Setting up robotic surgery in gynaecology: the experience of the Strasbourg teaching hospital.

Authors:  N Sananès; O Garbin; M Hummel; C Youssef; R Vizitiu; D Lemaho; D Rottenberg; P Diemunsch; A Wattiez
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-02-05

6.  Does size matter? The effect of uterine weight on robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy outcomes.

Authors:  Mona E Orady; A Karim Nawfal; Ganesa Wegienka
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-05-13

7.  From open radical hysterectomy to robot-assisted laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: aspects of a single institution learning curve.

Authors:  H W R Schreuder; R P Zweemer; W M van Baal; J van de Lande; J C Dijkstra; R H M Verheijen
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2010-04-13

8.  Updates and Controversies of Robotic-Assisted Surgery in Gynecologic Surgery.

Authors:  Aaron Varghese; Marisol Doglioli; Amanda N Fader
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 2.190

9.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic procedures in a fellowship training program.

Authors:  Paula S Lee; Amy Bland; Fidel A Valea; Laura J Havrilesky; Andrew Berchuck; Angeles Alvarez Secord
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Comparison of robotic-assisted hysterectomy to other minimally invasive approaches.

Authors:  Mona Orady; Alexander Hrynewych; A Karim Nawfal; Ganesa Wegienka
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2012 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.