Elizabeth J Geller1, Feng-Chang Lin, Catherine A Matthews. 1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7570, USA. egeller@med.unc.edu
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate the efficiency of procedural steps in robotic sacrocolpopexy and concomitant hysterectomy. DESIGN: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-seven patients who underwent robotic-assisted procedures from November 2007 through December 2010. INTERVENTIONS: Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Sixty patients (40.8%) underwent concomitant hysterectomy; 37 (25.2%), mid-urethral sling placement; and 7 (4.8%), concomitant colporrhaphy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Comparison of the first 20 procedures with the subsequent 127 demonstrated that there was considerable improvement in time of cuff closure (p = .04); sacral dissection (p = .004); anterior (p = .006), posterior, (p = .003), and sacral (p = .003) mesh attachment; peritoneal closure (p < .001); total docked time (p = .02); and total incision time (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Robotic efficiency improves over a short learning period, with greatest differences in intracorporeal suturing and overall times. Identifying these steps may aid surgeons and learners in improving overall efficiency and establishing benchmarks for performance.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate the efficiency of procedural steps in robotic sacrocolpopexy and concomitant hysterectomy. DESIGN: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-seven patients who underwent robotic-assisted procedures from November 2007 through December 2010. INTERVENTIONS: Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Sixty patients (40.8%) underwent concomitant hysterectomy; 37 (25.2%), mid-urethral sling placement; and 7 (4.8%), concomitant colporrhaphy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Comparison of the first 20 procedures with the subsequent 127 demonstrated that there was considerable improvement in time of cuff closure (p = .04); sacral dissection (p = .004); anterior (p = .006), posterior, (p = .003), and sacral (p = .003) mesh attachment; peritoneal closure (p < .001); total docked time (p = .02); and total incision time (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Robotic efficiency improves over a short learning period, with greatest differences in intracorporeal suturing and overall times. Identifying these steps may aid surgeons and learners in improving overall efficiency and establishing benchmarks for performance.
Authors: Brian J Linder; Mallika Anand; Amy L Weaver; Joshua L Woelk; Christopher J Klingele; Emanuel C Trabuco; John A Occhino; John B Gebhart Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jan Deprest; Ladislav Krofta; Frank Van der Aa; Alfredo L Milani; Jan Den Boon; Filip Claerhout; Jan-Paul Roovers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Angeline Favre; Stephanie Huberlant; Marie Carbonnel; Julie Goetgheluck; Aurelie Revaux; Jean Marc Ayoubi Journal: Front Surg Date: 2016-11-02