Literature DB >> 20207063

Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study.

Dimitri Sarlos1, Lavonne Kots, Nebojsa Stevanovic, Gabriel Schaer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Robotic surgery, with its technical advances, promises to open a new window to minimally invasive surgery in gynaecology. Feasibility and safety of this surgical innovation have been demonstrated in several studies, and now a critical analysis of these new developments regarding outcome and costs is in place. So far only a few studies compare robotic with conventional laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology. Our objective was to evaluate our initial experience performing total robot-assisted hysterectomy with the da Vinci surgical system and compare peri-operative outcome and costs with total laparoscopic hysterectomy. STUDY
DESIGN: For this prospective matched case-control study at our institution, peri-operative data from our first 40 consecutive total robot-assisted hysterectomies for benign indications were recorded and matched 1:1 with total laparoscopic hysterectomies according to age, BMI and uterus weight. Surgical costs were calculated for both procedures. Surgeons' subjective impressions of robotics were evaluated with a self-developed questionnaire.
RESULTS: No conversions to laparotomy or severe peri-operative complications occurred. Mean operating time was 109 (113; 50-170) min for the robotic group and 83 (80; 55-165) min for the conventional laparoscopic group. Mean postoperative hospitalisation for robotic surgery was 3.3 (3; 2-6) days versus 3.9 (4; 2-7) days for the conventional laparoscopic group. Average surgical cost of a robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy was 4067 euros compared to 2151 euros for the conventional laparoscopic procedure at our institution. For the robotic group wider range of motion of the instruments and better ergonomics were considered to be an advantage, and lack of direct access to the patient was stated as a disadvantage.
CONCLUSION: Robot-assited hysterectomy is a feasible and interesting new technique with comparable outcome to total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Operating times of total laparoscopic hysterectomy seem to be achieved quickly especially for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. However, costs of robotic surgery are still higher than for conventional laparoscopy. Randomised clinical trials need to be conducted to further evaluate benefits of this new technology for patients and surgeons and analyse its cost-effectiveness in gynaecology. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20207063     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.02.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  53 in total

1.  Robot-assisted total gastrectomy is comparable with laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Hong Man Yoon; Young-Woo Kim; Jun Ho Lee; Keun Won Ryu; Bang Wool Eom; Ji Yeon Park; Il Ju Choi; Chan Gyoo Kim; Jong Yeul Lee; Soo Jeong Cho; Ji Yoon Rho
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Economic evaluation of da Vinci-assisted robotic surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Giuseppe Turchetti; Ilaria Palla; Francesca Pierotti; Alfred Cuschieri
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Robot-assisted surgery:--impact on gynaecological and pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  O E O'Sullivan; B A O'Reilly
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies (ACCESS).

Authors:  E R Mueller; K Kenton; C Tarnay; L Brubaker; A Rosenman; B Smith; K Stroupe; C Bresee; A Pantuck; P Schulam; J T Anger
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 2.226

5.  Perioperative outcomes of three-port robotically assisted hysterectomy: a continuous series of 53 cases.

Authors:  Patrick Dällenbach; Patrick Petignat
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-03-11

6.  Analysis of postoperative pain in robotic versus traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Raymond E Betcher; James P Chaney; Pamela R Lacy; Stephen K Otey; Duke J Wood
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2013-07-03

7.  Proceedings from the Third National Institutes of Health International Congress on Advances in Uterine Leiomyoma Research: comprehensive review, conference summary and future recommendations.

Authors:  James H Segars; Estella C Parrott; Joan D Nagel; Xiaoxiao Catherine Guo; Xiaohua Gao; Linda S Birnbaum; Vivian W Pinn; Darlene Dixon
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 15.610

8.  A cost evaluation methodology for surgical technologies.

Authors:  Imad Ismail; Sandrine Wolff; Agnes Gronfier; Didier Mutter; Lee L Swanström; Lee L Swantröm
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  WITHDRAWN: Robotic surgery for benign gynaecological disease.

Authors:  Hongqian Liu; DongHao Lu; Gang Shi; Huan Song; Lei Wang
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-12-11

10.  Indications and Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Diseases. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S3 Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/070, April 2015)

Authors:  K J Neis; W Zubke; T Römer; K Schwerdtfeger; T Schollmeyer; S Rimbach; B Holthaus; E Solomayer; B Bojahr; F Neis; C Reisenauer; B Gabriel; H Dieterich; I B Runnenbaum; W Kleine; A Strauss; M Menton; I Mylonas; M David; L-C Horn; D Schmidt; P Gaß; A T Teichmann; P Brandner; W Stummvoll; A Kuhn; M Müller; M Fehr; K Tamussino
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 2.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.